Talk:Jack Thompson (activist)/Archive 6

message: Someone' shifted out the Paducah suit into a seperate article, which will need a bit of formatting as per the style guide. Just now it's a bit of a dangling section, but it was a good move as the article's very long. I suggest that we split off, say, all of the Cases section into one separate article ("Videogame-related legal cases of Jack Thompson"?), and the same with the Activism section, and leave this page to hold everything else. (Side note: I think that "Other Legal Cases" should be placed before his videogames-related ones and activism, for chronological order.) That should mean we've got 3 reasonably sized articles. Thoughts? Sockatume 14:01, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it. It shortens the article up a lot, so it's easier to browse through. Maybe in the sections where we split off, we should add a quick 1 sentence summary of the split article, so the reader knows what's linked to... Jabrwock 16:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with splitting off the article as well.  At present, it's just unwieldly huge and difficult to read, particularly in the view that the table of contents for the article alone is about a page long.--Vercalos 22:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Paducah suit article, and separating up the material

message: Because I'm awesome, the article's now easier to navigate. However, the Cases and Activism events could all do with going into chronological (or some other suitable) order if this layout is to work. Any volunteers?
:Excellent work. It *is* much easier to navigate now. Maybe this weekend I'll do some chronological sorting. Jabrwock 15:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Organisation

message: I'm doing a re-write in the sandbox, I'll replace the GTA-other, Postal, and Jacob Robida Murders section when I'm done. I'm merging all the sources, cleaning up the text, etc. When I'm done, it will all be condensed under "Jacob Robida Murders". Jabrwock 21:00, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jacob Robida Murders

message: I read the MGS.org section about the suicide, and i was quite moved by it as well. Its good that the community did what they could to help there friend in need. I believe the section should stay but in its entirety could be moved to either a stub or a some other page. I dont want to push anything because this is a very sensitive subject. I think if it was shortened a little it would be acceptable, i think that the dialogue including JT's first letter and then between him and MSG are especially important to keep, i think a little of the events that lead up to it should stay but since this article is about JT and not the young man it could be shortened. However on a more personal note, every life is important, when someone dies there should be a celebration about there life and the passing on, this is a tragedy that JT used for his own gain and he should be ashamed of himself as a human being and as a self-proclaimed man of God. Tik 19:53, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gamer's Suicide Section

message: Someone I know named Rich emailed Jack, saying the following:
"Mr Thompson,
You're a busy man, but I'd appreciate it if you gave me some serious thought. I'm not here to bash or chastise you- there's plenty of that going on. I want to appeal to your more logical side.
Jack, I want to address your persistant statements that people who play video games "have no lives". I have played video games for many years, and I have fond memories of doing so, much like you may have fond memories of playing baseball with your friends while growing up. I too have played sports as a child, and games were something else to do on those rainy and snowy days here in Michigan. In short, I have a life. A life I am very happy with, as a matter of fact. Video games have merely been a small part of that happiness. 
Now, my problems lie in several areas.
Firstly, you have cited God as some of your reasons for being so adamantly against games. God will be the ultimate Judge of good and evil. I do believe you have broken one of his teachings- Judge not lest ye be judged yourself. You have judged all video game players as degenerates and future murders, something I obviously take exception to. To date, I haven't killed anyone with a chainsaw or hit anyone with a car, and do you know why?
Because my parents were extremely moral people who had the common sense to instill a great amount of respect for my fellow man. I honestly think that your blaming some murders on video games and large corporate stores is catering to the set of parents out there that did not take the time to teach their children right from wrong, and they instead plopped their children down in front of the Sega while they enjoyed the peace it brought.
You see, I really do believe that you are serving the greater evil in this, Jack, and it troubles me. I see such wasted potential in you. I'm all for punishing those who have commited attrocities in this world, but your justifications are off. You're sending the wrong message to parents out there by allowing them to think that their hands are clean of any wrong doing their offspring may have committed. I really do think that you should be trying to send a better message here- that parents are ultimately responsible for raising their children, not some CD or cartridge. Most parents have opposable thumbs: you should instead be teaching them to use them to turn off the game when they do not like what they see. They really need to play a more active role in their childrens' upbringing. THAT is the true evil in this world.
They will listen to you, Jack, because they respect you. You could be doing something so much more productive and meaningful with your time. Instead, your actions are almost entirely reactionary rather than prevenative. If you really cared about these troubled youths, you'd be petitioning their parents to recognize and understand them rather than condemning them for their hobbies.
I don't honestly think that a single e-mail would change your mind on such matters. However, I do hope that you start to act more adult-like rather than tossing around labels and damning people without even recognizing them. I'm sure you've recieved emails in the past calling you "Hitler" or "Saddam-like", but that is not what I wish to do here today. I just want you to realize that there are better and more productive ways to go about this rather than this extremist view you have taken.
Jack, if you've read this far, then my hat is off to you. It proves that you are indeed willing to listen to others' points of view rather than completely submerge yourself in your own. For that, I thank you. But please, leave the judging for the man upstairs and instead do His work with a sense of respect for your fellow man. They're people too.
Thank you for your time."
Mr. Jack Thompson replied with exactly this:
"i don't have time to be scolded by you, junior. get a life"
(above unsigned)
----------------------
This guy basically summed up how most of us gamers feel about him, and what the flaws of the argument are about. You can tell the maturity on behalf of both parties and as usual it does not side with mr. thompson. Whats ironic is that JT usually can sum up how awful gamers are with one sentence, however this time he wrote a sentence and a fragment and did the same thing to himself. There is no hope for JT and this article is just going to expand and expand till he either dies of old age or just physically not able to sue anyone else (probably the former). The writer definately deserves a lot of respect for at least taking the initiative and writing to JT. Tik 15:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that Jack-O's reached that age where people are so old they act like children again..  Seriously, objectively compare his actions with a kid who uses his LJ to complain about everything, and to an adult of middle age.  He acts more like a child than an adult.  And I'm not being particularly biased, though I personally hate the man..  Hmm..  I just had an idea..--Vercalos 09:18, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jack's Counters

message: http://flowersforjack.livejournal.com/543.html
Are they really that sure this is the best idea? Knowing Jack he'll probably perform a public exorcism on them then start screaming they were laced with anthrax as the belated men in white coats drag him away...
Seriously though, why don't they just push to get his license to practice law suspended? He's already in the bad books of his local BAR, all he needs is a few thousand direct complaints before he'll have no choice to give up, no doubt giving a final sickening speech as to how 'good' has once again been silenced.
What are your thoughts on this e-ambulance-chaser, guys? (not Jack in general, the Flowers for Jack thing - I realise putting your thoughts down about Jack would probably make this an R-18 discussion). CitrusC 10:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flowers For Jack *Discussion* 

message: http://www.metalgearsolid.org/featurez/articles/mitch_article.php
What the HELL is wrong with this mentalist. I'm so pissed with him at the moment I can bearly write a coherant sentence, let alone an unbiased report on the incident. I seriously hope someone goes out of their way to cause him harm, I'm sick of his delusional christian 'warrior' facades in order to line his own DAMN POCKETS! CitrusC 01:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Doesn't this deserve it's own section on the page instead of being stuffed in 'other video game-related cases'? That would be much easier for news agencies to find. --King Nintendoid 18:41, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Other than the immediate backlash, I can't see this leading to anything further. So for now, no, I don't think this needs it's own section. Jabrwock 15:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *It DOES need to be edited though. The intro is a direct copy from another site. It needs to be paraphrased a bit to clean it up. Jabrwock 20:48, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

text: *Jack Thompson is a hair away from being Fred Phelps.
PLEASE stop, this page gets topics all the time like this, i know you want to flame JT, thats fine but WISHING BODILY HARM TO JT WILL NOT BE TOLERATED ON THIS SITE. It does not belong here and will become a liability to the site and to yourself should anything happen to him. Remember the guy who wrote on this site some old senator had something to do with JFK's death? yeah they tracked his IP to a business and he publically had to apologize while at the same time losing his job, he could also face defamation charges if need be. I dont think you want all this, and if harm came to JT as a result of these posts you could face jail-time. Just be smarter about what you post, or at least post it on a forum site where noone will think to look. Tik 15:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This needs to be added ASAP 

message: Looks less like a writer writing an editorial, and more like a photocopy of a press release Thompson sent out. Until we have details about the "lawsuit settlement" I'm going to say we need to treat it as Thompson "claiming" he has an agreement with Best Buy. Besides, one incident does not prove anything. NIMF (who did the original survey) surveyed tons of sales. Jabrwock 20:00, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yet they give no details about the "agreement", and like I said, it looks exactly like the writer took a press release from Thompson, and added a few comments of his own. This is not a NPOV news story, it's an editorial. Jabrwock 19:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best Buy Lie? 

message: I'm going to do some research on the Malvo case, becase the entry is full of inaccuracies: (AFAIK) there was no van (it was a car with a hole drilled in the trunk to shoot through, there was no mention of a Playstation, and Halo isn't available for the PS anyway... Jabrwock 16:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Washington Sniper entry inaccurate 

message: I've read most of the article but I didn't see this mentioned anywere(I haven't added it either), but I seem to remember there being a series of letters exchanged between Jack Thompson and a young teenage gamer who attempted to argue with him logically and without insults or profanity..  Is it actually mentioned in the article, or should it be added if it isn't?--Vercalos 03:32, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Letters from a Teenage Gamer 

message: I am adding paraphrasing and a subsection under Video Game controversy over his revocation of his alabama Law license per the source: http://ps2.ign.com/articles/668/668345p1.html . I am also adding that site to the sources.
:Please make sure you actually read the article to see if the info is already there... his license to practice in Alabama relates directly to his participation in Strickland v Sony, which is why the info was posted under there Jabrwock 01:24, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, this is the 2nd time someone's just tacked this on to the article. If you think it deserves to go in a new section, please discuss here, otherwise just add to the section already present. Jabrwock 03:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thompson's Alabama License Revoked 

message: I found this while looking for his date of birth.
"Miami Attorney Jack Thompson, who has been a specialist for 20 years in medical/legal issues, including infectious diseases while representing major South Florida hospitals and the Red Cross, alerts the media to the following urgent news analysis
There has been a universal and thus remarkable failure on the part of all media to address the possibility that the "Norwalk-like flu virus" besieging primarily the Disney Cruise Line may be the work of al-Qaeda affiliated bioterrorists." 
http://www.torontofreepress.com/2002/inter120202.htm
No controversy because he wrote it. I personally think this is just as nuts as his video game stuff. Maluka 04:42, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack's article from  2002 connecting al-Qaeda with Disney Cruise virus 

message: Just stop it. Don't we want the world to see why you hate Jack Thompson so much? 68.85.141.253 00:16, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Since we have the ip's logged, perhaps someone can do research on them?Cantthinkofausername 22:36, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Most of the one's I've seen have come from various secondary school IPs. Jabrwock 21:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I just had to delete another vandal... 69.163.20.19 23:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Come on you recent vandals... 

message: Not only was my entry about why the discussion "talk" page removed, now someone has taken it upon themselves to move the page???  It seems 3 different people felt fit to make drastic changes without anyone else having a say.  Move it, my ass. Maluka 14:08, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You're not understanding..  I'm trying to correct the problem, objecting will leave things as they are (with the talk page being out of sync with the page it was attached to). You want to support moving this page (Talk:Jack Thompson (attorney)) to the new talk page location (Talk:Jack Thompson). PLEASE NOTE: For the time being I've placed a redirect on the new Talk:Jack Thompson page that redirects here. Until an administrator can correct the botched move of Jack Thompson (attorney) to Jack Thompson this is the best solution I could think of to keep the old conversations going. -Locke Cole 14:35, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm admittedly confused. I was trying to write I got it wrong and got the message someone had changed the page since I began and to start over or something. I want the talk page as it was. Thanks for helping with the botched move. With the redirect I'm unable to remove my opposition. Any suggestions? Maluka 14:46, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You can change your opposition/support at Talk:Talk:Jack Thompson (attorney). Sorry about not including the link here. -Locke Cole 14:55, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I was a little confused too about it until I went poking into the history to see what had been done (and then realized that I'd been redirected from Jack Thompson (attorney) to Jack Thompson). Just to be clear, moving the page shouldn't be a problem (nothing to get up in arms about I mean). But unfortunately whoever moved it (you can see their name in the history if you want to find out) didn't move the talk page (where we're at right now) along with it. The best "fix" for this that I can think of is to move this talk page (and all the archives on it) to the new Talk:Jack Thompson page. Unfortunately a new talk page had already been created there, so simply moving this page myself wasn't an option. As I'm not an administrator I don't have the ability to fix the problem myself. This is why I requested a move of this talk page. In order for the move to be made, a consensus of users must agree to the move within 5 days. If you'd like to support the move, you can change your vote on Talk:Talk:Jack Thompson (attorney). I hope this cleared up how we got where we are. ;) -Locke Cole 14:55, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Herm. What move? Why move? There's another (an actor) Jack Thompson who was I believe born under this name. This ("our") JT dirtball wasn't born under the name Jack. He shouldn't get the fame of having the main page, no sirreee bob. He got all the attention a shitbag like him deserves. I say NO MOVE TO MAIN PAGE! NO! 81.218.214.205 21:54, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Main page was already moved. This request is to correct the mistaken dropping of this talk page (and their respective archives). Even if you're against moving Jack Thompson (attorney) to Jack Thompson, you've got to agree that whatever decision is made with that move must also include the talk page and respective archives. -Locke Cole 04:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just what the hell is going on? 

message: Please voice your support or opposition at Talk:Talk:Jack Thompson (attorney). There's 4 or 5 pages of archives on this talk page that I'd hate to see lost. -Locke Cole 14:57, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: NO! 81.218.214.205 22:02, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Your support or opposition will not be counted here as far as I know. Please vote at Talk:Talk:Jack Thompson (attorney). Also, please see my reply to you above. -Locke Cole 04:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Move 

message: Not really quite JT related, but they mentioned him about once or twice.
Suprisingly, it's a supporting article.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/28/tech/gamecore/main992768.shtml
81.218.214.205 22:02, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Great article, Ori. At first I thought you meant it was supportive of JT instead of being supportive of video games. Maluka 03:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Article 

message: I removed the "ctrl+alt+delete" cartoon, it was offensive and didn't offer anything interesting regarding Jack Thompson (no, a comic about a child being raped by an arcade machine isn't funny kids, GROW UP!).66.201.163.236
Oh how I ironic. By telling people do this, on a place where you should not, has actually shown you to be immature, and not worthy to comment on Wikipedia, as you do not understand its principles at all. --Chardonnay 22:30, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the removal of this comic, particually because the use of the image is probably a copy-vio. However, I would warn 66.201.163.236 that calling the other editors here "kids" and telling them to "GROW UP" could be considered insulting and thus violate WP:CIVIL. Please choose your words with more care. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 16:57, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, hey, I didn't know being a kid was so bad. Also, I'll tell my grandma to stop telling me to grow up and get a job already because, wow, telling someone to grow up is such an insult. I guess I don't live in the warped world where mature means to shoot people in the face. 66.201.163.236
Oh, your maturity summed up in a few short sentences. Please go somewhere else to spread your views on the world, a place where the point of the place is to talk about views. In front of a brick wall may be the best option. --Chardonnay 22:30, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

text: If I were your grandmother I'd probably tell you where to go. What in the world are you doing here if you have such a dim view of gamers. What's with the attitude? Maluka 17:13, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Maluka, as as I said on your talk page. Everyone (bar those users that have been banned) has a right to be here. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 17:21, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Duly noted. It's that old knee-jerk thing :) Maluka 18:27, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm a Shigeru Miyamoto fan, I like Zelda and Nintendogs. I also love Interactive Fiction and adventure games in general. 66.201.163.236
And this has what to do with the article? --Chardonnay 22:30, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Please don't confuse the editors of this page with the creators/fans of the various webcomics in this article or simply with gamers in general. When we are here we are all editors who should leave our biases at the door. So yes, I do consider telling us to "grow up" offensive and uncivil and I'm fairly sure I'm not the only one. Argue the facts of the article not the traits of the editors. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 17:21, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Agreed. I tried to delete it before, but it was restored. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 11:40, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

text: We link to plenty of webcomics about him. There's no need to show one too. Besides, I'm pretty sure it doesn't count as fair-use. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 20:46, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lame webcomics 

message: This seems like a weird complaint, but I almost think this article is so detailed it ends up being POV.  I don't like Jack Thompson or what he is doing (or more specifically, how he is doing it), but goodness, I feel like I know everything he's done since the Hot Coffee controversy.  I almost feel like I should be knowing when he's had his own coffee.  The writing doesn't seem POV in itself; I think it is very neutral in terms of writing quality.  But I wonder if we are POV, because nearly all of the information in the article portrays him negatively.  It almost seems like we need to get a big picture view of Jack Thompson, and maybe be more selective.  Of course, I don't know how this fits into the NPOV policy, since most of the writing doesn't seem to attack him personally, it's just a deluge against him with the amount of information used.  Mred64 03:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is based on all the press he has garnered, and most of it has been negative. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 05:54, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

text: The way to balance this article is to find and add some positive press, not to remove the negitive stuff. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 11:30, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good luck!  He creates his  own negative press with his ridiculous press releases and lawsuits. He sends them to gaming sites and gets involved with the discussion on Game Politics, where he continues to insult gamers. He eats this up.Maluka 03:05, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Is that possible?  Every time Thompson has spoken out he sounds like an f'ing idiot...first, claiming that the Sims 2 was a sex game (when some quick research would have clearly said it had no such things), the Vice City supposed "nude cheat," backing out of his Modest Game proposal, and other insane incidents.  Hell, I thought he might have a bright part before these games cases, but calling Janet Reno a closet lesbian and related to the Mafia?!?! Hbdragon88 23:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Clearly, this article is unusually long and detailed, but is that a bad thing? None of these "news items" will suddenly become irrelevant when they cease to be current. So long as it remains pertinent, coherent and navigable, the only drawback is that many other articles seem superficial by comparison. Furthermore, the details may cast JT in a uniformly negative light, but Wikipedia can't be held accountable for connotation; sometimes, the facts just speak for themselves, even when imparted in the dryest and most unbiased of ways. 85.65.83.124 10:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it's a little bit much to read. You can only hold someones attention for so long. Reub2000 22:09, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Well,if you are a resident of the US, then you are fed with a constant influx of information related to Mr JT's exploits. However, for non-US people, this page is very very informative and paints an accurate picture of the man. Well, it is the most unbiased description of him that I have seen online.Infact, most of what I have come to know about him are courtesy wikipedia.(and the links in the article).Plz pardon my english.--59.93.195.77 15:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality? 

message: I think we need a re-organization of the info in some sections. Some info, such as Thompson's views, cross over between other sections (his attacks on Doug Lowenstein are listed in video game cases, and under his views). Should his opinions on Lowenstein be under Video Game Cases? Because they don't directly relate to any particular case at hand. Jabrwock 19:43, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info crossing over between sections 

message: As far as I can tell, Thompson's place of birth was noted as South Africa until 08:48, October 29, 2005 when 24.93.102.41 changed it to Ohio. Ohio sounds more believable, really, but I still think someone needs to verify this? It's hard because the Wikipedia article stood for such a long time saying it was South Africa, and therefore many external sources may have in turn cited it as such though it was incorrect. -VJ 23:46, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In Thompson's book he says he grew up in Cleveland, Ohio. The publisher gives you a PDF sample of the first chapter.  Jabrwock 18:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I see it, but growing up doesn't necessarily equate to being born in. Moreover, I wonder where the South Africa thing came from and why, if it was false, it remained there untouched for such a long time. I mean, for an article undergoing this much scrutiny, isn't that a little weird? -VJ 22:42, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  True. Maybe we should change it to "grew up in Ohio" until we can confirm his birthplace? Jabrwock 15:29, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My thoughts exactly. Good call. -VJ 03:28, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place of birth 

message: Akron Beacon Journal has apparently deleted the article for source 5.  Does anyone have an alternate article?
17:21, 13 November 2005
:There's a lot of sites commenting on Thompson offering to defend the accused, but the ABJ was the only news article which documented it I think. Jabrwock 18:02, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated Source 

message: I noticed that there wasn't anything on Thompson's reaction to Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories web site's parody of groups and people like him.
My summery of what went on(that I don't want to submit because it is too wordy, could be shortened a lot, and I question how legit it is):
Rockstar made a parody of him on their site for their new GTA game.  They have a letter from someone in the group Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety(Abbreviated as C.U.N.T.F.L.A.P.S) that wants to turn off the internet, which is obviously making fun of the various groups wanting to protect us from stuff they deem harmful(movies, games, the internet, etc).  It makes even more sense when they later added a section on how a history game ruined some women's relation(by having the positive effect of making the guy a better person).
The letter was from a concerned parent who looked up "teenage water sports" when trying to find sport activates involving water for their daughter.  Obviously they didn't get the intended results, and were quite offened by the all the sexual-themed results.
Also in the fake email, and audio clip features a boy talking to his mom about the nude man in his room.  The kid claims that he met his new "friend" named "Jack" on the internet.
Jack Thompson notices this, and sends out a press-release about what he perceives as an attack on him by Rockstar Games.  He came to the conclusion that the initials JT was for Jack Thompson(which in the context does makes sense), but from there he read too much into this and blows things out of proportion.  He insisted JT was really him, was the "the Miami, Florida (Liberty City) anti-violent video game crusader"(that info was not given anywhere in the letter, the letter didn't proclaim anything about being a "anti-violent video game crusader" and from my recollection the GTA series mainly deals with fictional cities, and Liberty City sure isn't located in or based on Florida), and along with the audio clip claims that “Bisexual pedophile Jack Thompson is the combined message” 
Related urls: http://www.rockstargames.com/libertycitystories/ (at the top of the flash scroll left, the featured fake email is under "CITIZENSUNITEDNEGATINGTECHNOLOGY" and you can select & copy the letter's text)
Game Politics is where the story originates from http://www.livejournal.com/users/gamepolitics/87105.html
Only problem I have and see about this is the question on just how legit this email is.  As of typing this I realized most places link back to gamepolitcs as their source, and none of the major news organizations or game media mentions this.  It does fit as something that he would find and complain about, and most recently he has been posting anonymous comments at Gamepolitics(which Gamepolitics verifies which anonymous comments are his, so they must know his IP or something).  This wiki does feature a section on Jack Thompson's replies on gamepolitcs, so I guess by the wiki's standards they could be considered creditable. You can try asking them for a copy to see how legit this is, I guess the other game news outlets just ignored or filtered out Jack's spamming(has done this before to other people/sites).
Tried looking his address up in the usenet group news.admin.net-abuse.sightings if someone reported his spam, but it didn’t show there.  But I wouldn't consider that to be much proof as to it not being legit, most people don't bother to report spam.
01:54, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  I haven't seen this issue featured on the wiki. 

message: Should we include his spat with Governor Jeb Bush's office, where he called them liars when they denied that the Governor had asked Thompson to write gaming legislation? It was the usual "they called me first" kind of thing, where Thompson initially offered to write a law, and contacted the office, to be told he should submit it to his leg rep. He then sent out press releases thanking the Governor for personally asking him to write & submit a law, and claimed he had the Governor's official backing, which according to the press office, he did not. Some politician eventually submitted a proposed law, but it was a copy of the California bill, rather than Thompson's copy.    Jabrwock 18:37, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Florida gaming law aka Thompson vs Jeb Bush 

message: I know this has been brought up before that all the comics so far have been biased against Thompson, but maybe we should list them anyway, down by the news articles about him? List them under Parodies or something, so it's clear they are making fun of him? Links only, so there's no issue of copy-vio, and people who don't want to see them can just skip over that section. Jabrwock 18:48, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I put a Parodies sections in, with warnings that content may offend. Jabrwock 17:12, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the warning. Wikipedia is not censored. I don't see why this shouldn't apply to what we link to, also. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 22:32, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I had no idea. I remember some were complaining that the comics shouldn't be included because they were offensive. But I guess they were specifically talking about comics that were in-line, not linked to. Jabrwock 23:14, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comics 

message: I think the external links section is getting a bit out of control. We should remove some of the more non-notable links. (For example, blogs, forums and smaller news sites.) What do others think about this? --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 22:32, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Links that are necessary for reference should be put up in the text of the article. Anything else should be examined for relevance. Jabrwock 23:12, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Not a very good title, but I thought someone should add an article on this - http://www.gamespot.com/news/6140117.html
For those who can't be bothered reading, he has been removed from the case in Alabama against Rockstar Games etc which he was doing on behalf of the policemen's families. He was removed for bad conduct, and also had his ability to practice law in Alabama stripped from him. Sound like a worthy addition?
:The fact that he had his ability to practice law in Alabama stripped from him is definitly a worthy addition. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 14:14, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Already mentioned at the end of Strickland vs. Sony, but I added this link to the original ref. Jabrwock 15:43, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack Thompson looking for work outside of Alabama 

message: Feel free to delete/ignore this if it turns out to be nothing, but some guy in his 20's shot up a mall in Tacoma with an assault rifle, so I imagine we'll see a "press release" from Thompson soon linking this to GTA. The scenario reminded me of a mission in Vice City where you have to go on a rampage in a shopping mall, so...  Apparently he text-messaged his girlfriend "Today is the day that the world will know my anger." just before he started shooting.  Jabrwock 16:49, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tacoma shooting 

message: Ironically his last name is also the name of a gun
:And this matters how? Jabrwock 16:45, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: His given name is also similar to the name of a particular German porn label's producer. Coincidence? Yes. Noteworthy? NO! -- Ashmodai 02:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last Name Relation 

message: I removed the ActiveDiscuss template. The page seems to be neutral and factual now. Most of the stuff that happened before the article was created has now been documented. If anyone disagrees, feel free to re-add it. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 19:21, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed ActiveDiscuss template 

message: I searched through the Stern Fan Network and found out that they love to do a lot of pranks.  I found no news articles on Jack Thompson's threat and there were no topics on Jack Thompson on the Stern network that I noticed.  I could be wrong so someone else please search too.  BTW, don't be fooled by the IP address and username pranks on their board either :)
:Good call. I'll comment it out until we have a source for the "threat". Jabrwock 22:41, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I have an issue with this article too. I tried googling it and I can't find the original source or thread.KungFu-tse 18:53, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Howard Stern Update Could Be A Hoax

message: Due to the (nearly) daily acts of minor vandalism, I've requested Semi Protection for this article. Basically it just prevents new & anon accounts from editing, as most of the vandalism on this article seems to be minor acts from anon accounts. Jabrwock 22:40, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This would be really handy. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 23:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently semi-protection is only a proposal right now, not policy, but if they implement it I will re-request that this page be protected by it. Jabrwock 22:13, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Might as well protect the page before Jack Thompson decides to accuse Wikipedia of Libel and sue. Cantthinkofausername 20:04, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently the rules are we can't pre-emptively use semi protection. We need to request it when there is a spat of anon vandalism, like on weekends. And it's only temporary, like a 24 lock or less. Jabrwock 15:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You only need to look at he history to see this article is vandalized every day. I wish permanent protection was possible. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 17:12, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that Wikipedia has already gotten into hot water over someone else where an article was considered to be libelious, I wouldn't be surprised if Jack-*** here decides to add to his resume of taking down Wikipedia. --Cantthinkofausername 21:06, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah but unlike that libelous article, which contained false info, is there anything here that is false? If so, edit it. If not, he hasn't got a leg to stand on. Jabrwock 22:24, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If someone can sue over Hot Coffee (spilled into a lap and causing burns, not entering a code that makes amputee porn look hotter.), I wouldn't put it past Jackie-boy in attempting such a stunt.--Cantthinkofausername 10:36, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-Protection 

message: Thompson is currently claiming he'll be called as a witness at the Alabama (strickland v sony) case, but there's a court order saying if he contacts court or judge, he'll be charged with contempt of court. Would he be exempt if he's called as a witness? Anyone know? Jabrwock 18:24, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alabama case 

message: I'm so surprised this hasn't been added. His plans are to take them down.
http://joystiq.com/2005/12/22/take-two-gets-a-new-shareholder-jack-thompson/ Maluka 19:29, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already under "Other video game-related incidents". However, it was just announced recently, so there's not much information on it for now.KungFu-tse 18:51, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack Buys Shares In Take-Two 

message: Hey, shouldn't that still be in the article since it shows how hypocritical Jack actually is?  Here's what was there awhile back:
"However, Thompson appeared to have no problem with a positive review from a user called BushSupporter which also violated the terms of service and was subsequently removed from the site. The review is as follows:
"Jack Thompson has been unfairly slapped with some negative reviews on Amazon specifically because he's telling the truth and these gamers can't take it. There's an epidemic of violence in the US and a decline in moral values in our society. If you don't believe me just go to Skinny Puppy's The Greater Wrong of the Right LIVE DVD and read one of the reviews there. One person thinks it's cool that a band did a mock assassination of Bush and claims that the band "has balls" for doing it. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that something is definitely wrong with the youth of this country. The specific reason is because of our junk culture that presents images of sex and violence for everyone to see and glorifies this behavior. I can't believe that anyone can't see the problems in our society and can't identify the source. Thompson has discussed information about brainwaves and how these brainwaves while playing videogames are different than normal people. One study even compares the brainwaves to those of people addicted to hard drugs. Jack Thompson knows what he is talking about and you should pick up his book. Don't listen to these videogame addicts that are angry at the truth.""
I found some info about this review.  Jack said something about it which can be read here
"I have found that the offending reviews are still up at your site, but I find, interestingly, that a review by someone calling himself "Bushsupporter" who gave my book, Out of Harm's Way, four stars and a favorable review, has been removed from the site. Curious."
- www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1525624/posts
:Scroll up to Talk Discussion #3 on "Amazon.com Threatened With Legal Action". I thought that posting the entire "BushSupporter" review adds little or no significance to the article, which is why I deleted it. Yes, Thompson did mention the review in his complaint to Amazon.com, but I didn't see why the whole review had to be posted. The way I interpret his letter, he was merely complaining to Amazon.com why negative reviews were still there and why this one positive review got deleted. But once you examine the contents of the review, it does seem hypocritical of Thompson to complain about the removal of this review when this review is in fact also in violation of Amazon's rules. Still, I don't see what the big deal is. Thompson never said he "supported" the review. He said that he was "curious" as to why a positive review was deleted. I'm not even sure if he even read the review.
:My point is that this is supposed to be an online encyclopedia, and posting an entire online review in an encyclopedia isn't exactly relevant source material. We have to conform to a certain standard when writing articles.
:But if you think the review should be placed back, that's fine by me. However, if you do decide to place it back, I think the opening sentence needed to be revised to something like "In his reply to Amazon.com, Thompson questioned the removal of a review by "BushSupporter", which gave his book four stars and a favorable review.  The original review is as follows: (insert BushSupporter review here)" or something like that. Anyone else have an opinion?KungFu-tse 16:00, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it should stay specifically because it shows how JT supports breaking the rules when it's convenient for his side but won't allow the same for the opposition.  Also, there's the fact that the review was removed from Amazon and I couldn't ever find it using the Internet archives.  The only way to find out what he's talking about is to see it in this discussion area or a few other places.  Maybe just link to the discussion page, Game Politics, or anywhere else that bothered to copy and paste that review instead of posting the whole thing in the article? - JTHater
It's a shame Gamers Against Jack has been down because a 14 year old kid  wrote a review, containing his phone number, and Jack called and left a message for his parents, saying he wanted to talk to them about their son and his internet activities.  Maluka 04:21, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  That Amazon Review Jack Supported 

message: This is 71KB in size. Maybe we should split this up? Reub2000 03:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size! 

message: This time he asks for help from Bush .KungFu-tse 00:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it just me, or is he just trying to get a competitor discredited?--Vercalos 03:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty much. They represent Take Two, so in pretty much every videogame-related legal effort he's ever been connected to, they were on the other side. So instead of attacking them in-court, he's working on getting them discredited outside of court. Jabrwock 17:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jack after Blank Rome again

message: After reading through this talk page, I didn't see any overwhelming support of whomever cropped the article a few edits back, and so I restored it. CaptHayfever 19:12, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Who stubbed this?

message: I've spoken to an FCC spokeswoman that said the fines are given out based mostly on the amount of complaints sent into the FCC.  Whether Jack Thompson sent in a complaint is irrelevant, as groups similar to the Parent's Television Council has sent in quite a bit themselves (not sure if they did for this specific complaint, but I'm sure there are similar groups out there that have done so).   I argue that this section should be removed, as it implies that his sole complaint was the reason for the FCC fine, unless someone can furnish proof that it was only Thompson's doing.  The source listed at the bottom of the page is probably false, as the FCC does not cite specific complaints or numbers of complaints, so unless he has some secret FCC source I doubt it's true.Addboy 08:25, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True. Stern has blamed "That Lunatic Lawyer" for a lot of his problems though, so they do have a history. Maybe we could re-write it so it doesn't credit Thompson with the complaint? It should also be re-written that Stern wasn't kicked off the air, but rather they just refused to renew his contract, so when it expired, he moved to Sirius. Which link were you referring to? The Forbes one following the Stern article is just detailing Stern's move to Sirius. Jabrwock 15:48, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it could merely be mentioned that he was outspoken against Howard Stern somewhere in the article. I'm a ltitle too busy right now to check the souce, but it was listed in the "Links" section at the bottom.  It was essentially some blogger alleging that he was the main reason for the FCC fine.  Addboy 21:35, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Howard Stern FCC allegation

message: Web Archive of FreeRepublic.com
Here's the events leading up to Thompson's banishment from FreeRepublic.com in 2000. Think we should list this? First he posted a news article saying that anonymous libelers can be sued, then threatens the site owner. He says "Additionally, since Bill Clinton is a treasonous whore, no false defamation occurs in labeling him such." Following this, he was banned. Jabrwock 19:56, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If that goes in, it'd be best placed with the section on the NIMF's response to him, and his subsequent tirade against them. They're a support whom he's managed to alienate through his distinctive discursive style. Sockatume 21:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I remember seeing that when I was googling Jack Thompson and Janet Reno. It seems that he makes enemies everywhere he goes.KungFu-tse 02:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack banned from FreeRepublic.com 

message: Thompson is calling on Running With Scissors, accusing them of providing "Jew-haters" with "murder simulators" so they can practice "open season on jews." RWS responded by pointing out that Postal 2 only has 1 jewish employee in-game, and he's not identified as jewish. Jabrwock 19:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting showdown between RWS & Thompson? 

message: In one of the recent vandalisms someone edited the GTS:LCS part and replaced "girls" with "boys", and it still appears to be there.  See the edits here.  The last part with the naked man is still correct, and should stay.
Plus the quote doesn't seem quite right, Jack said "likes to surf the Internet for pictures depicting deviant sex acts by teenage girls."  The quote in the wiki uses the word "prepubescent", which seems to have been there for a while and ISN'T related to the recent vandalism. GuybrushThreepwood 06:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed it. Good catch. Jabrwock 15:23, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, and I agree with the keeping it locked for a bit. Give people time to simmer down. Thompson really pushed people's buttons this time... Jabrwock 15:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well yeah, you use a gamer's suicide to push your own agenda, that crosses a huge line.  Even more than just attacking the games themselves. - Hbdragon88 23:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I may get fingers wagged at me, but I call this insensitive jerk, Jack Cough. Maluka 06:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Got locked, and I noticed a change that needs fixing... 

message: I'm not sure how we feel about blogs, but this guy's been getting a lot of attention for a piece he posted on Jack.  He seems to back up all his claims with actual sources... but I'm a little hesitant to throw this up...
http://my.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=6402632&publicUserId=5242551
:Maybe just list it under "Opposing views" for now. Jabrwock 15:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add it. It's great. Maluka 15:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something we might want to add... 

message: No surprise here, but it looks like he got himself a LJ account in order to post on GP again.
And it looks like this thread confirms it to be his.  Figured I would point it out since I couldn't find a LJ comment history type search, and this give us confirmation that the account & comment belongs to him. GuybrushThreepwood 23:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For such a wordy mofo, I find the blank journal most amusing.  According to GP, he had an LJ, deleted it, then got another one. Confusing, no? Maluka 15:19, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Jabrwock, please clue me in as to how you find his email addresses on his LJ accounts. I belong to GP, too, and have never seen an email address involved and the current LJ gives up nothing.  Thanks. Maluka 17:00, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Click on his name in the post, and then again on his name on his own personal LJ page, and it gives you info like his email addy. Jabrwock 21:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

text: He's more dense than I realized or is this a cunning way to get more emails? There's an option to hide email on LJ. He could have done that, but how Jack would that be? :) Maluka 06:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack is back on GP with a Live Journal Account... 

message: http://www.slutbear.com/thompsonsoft/index.html
The definitive Osaki Kim game has arrived.  It follows all the terms set out in the 'Modest Proposal', and now all that's left is to find the favorite charity of Paul Eibeler.
Party hard! T ConX 06:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  And it looks like Jack has commented about the game here. Not that I have been following it, but I take it whittakerchambe is his most LJ recent account, and from his comment here I guess it is a refrence to Whittaker Chambers. GuybrushThreepwood 05:35, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The site has moved, as Thompson has alledgedly threatened the host. Jabrwock 18:06, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While it sounds like Jack Thompson, would he actually make an e-mail account called arrogantattorney? Mred64 04:29, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As much as the idea of an e-mail account called "arrogantattorney" seems far-fetched, one needs to consider his past behavior on blogs, message boards, and other forms of electronic communication.  Most people would agree that he is very volatile, and the fact he uses phrases such as "pwned" to mock people in GamePolitics.com, as well as "Hooah!", only makes it seem even more possible he'd use an e-mail address like that.--Resident Lune 20:00, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Besides, GamePolitics.com uses IP logging for LiveJournal, and knows Thompson's "current" IP addresses. And GP verified that WhittakerChamber is posting from those IPs, so it's likely Thompson himself, or one of the computers he uses. Jabrwock 21:58, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's here... 

message: New stuff today. Thompson publicly chastising Bristol County DA for not doing his job. Insists games are to blame for neo-nazi attack. DA says no games found, and no evidence of a link. Thompson announces games have "been ditched" and orders DA to "do your job". Thompson relying on 3rd party heresay, namely a detective interviewed some of the guy's friends, and they said he "played GTA". Raid on his house nets computer but no gaming console. Thompson calls DA "media pretty boy who doesn’t want to tick off the entertainment industry."
Truth is stranger than fiction... GamePolitics.com for the latest... Jabrwock 17:41, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack vs. Brisol County DA 

message: I know that we typically Merge two articles of similar or identical topics into one when they don't have enough content individually, or their content is essentially the same, but what about splitting up articles?  Jack Thompson has so much about him that we should probably split up the article into multiple article, the main article being a simple biography, and the other articles being about his legal career, his personal correspondences with various people, and maybe a 3rd and 4th article to cover everything that doesn't fit in the bio, career, or correspondence sections..--Vercalos 09:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article division. 

message: Is there any disagreement that this should be submitted as a featured article candidate, or at least to peer review? If not, then I'd like to submit it for that. ⇒ SWATJester  Ready  Aim  Fire! 22:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  featuring? 

message: Whatever you think about Jack Thompson can I please request that in dealing with him everyone tries to remain absolutely civil at all times. If it just descends into a slanging match then it won't help anyone. Thanks.--Cherry blossom tree 22:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh.  He doesn't respond to anything, so it doesn't matter if you're civil or not to him.  If he thinks you're beneath his notice, or his enemy, he won't listen to a word you say, a fact he often demonstrates in his correspondance with the people who have contacted him.--Vercalos 22:47, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't doubt you're right. I'd never heard of him until half an hour ago so I can't claim any knowledge at all. Even if it won't help, though, civility is its own reward, as someone probably once said.--Cherry blossom tree 22:59, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The only use being civil to him I can think of is if we decide to file a lawsuit.  The man is totally incapable of being civil with anyone who disagrees with him.  "I was just suggesting he should approach the issue differently and he called me an autistic savant and threatened to sue me for harassment if I contacted him again."  Note, that is a theoretical scenario.  I've never heard of Jack-O using the phrase 'autistic savant,' he has however often threatened to sue people for harassment over just about anything they do to him.  Including sending flowers to him.(See Flowers for Jack in main article)--Vercalos 23:04, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Careful... us talking about suing him (as you did above) might be a violation of WP:NLT. If we're gonna hold others like Jack to this rule, we should follow it ourselves. *Dan T.* 15:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

text: By the way, to counter Jack's claims, I think we should try to find sources to support the information from news sites that aren't strictly about gaming.  He'll have less support for his position if he does try to sue Wikipedia if we cite sources that are comparatively unbiased.--Vercalos 23:09, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are already a number of sources listed on the page which are not gaming media, and in general, the article is extremely well researched. It links 153 times to relevant sites, it has several dozens of links at the bottom, almost every quote is backed up. Now i will admit to being no fan of Jack Thompson (Being an atheist leftwing gamer who visits the PA-forums on a daily basis) so i am not the best judge of NPOV, but i can see very little wrong, or even inaccurate with the article. I would not be worried to much about being sued either, there is (documented, on this very site) history of him threatening to sue whenever people write about him. What i am wondering, is it notable enough to have a sentence or paragraph about this incident itself, or is that not to be under wiki rules? (i will confess to only being a passing wiki'er). This incident has already made the (gaming) internet media [] as well as hitting the forums []SanderJK 00:16, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Civility goes a long way towards helping maintain NPOV. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 05:17, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Civility

message: The wikiquote article could use some re-organization and the headers definitely need to be renamed. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 13:50, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  wikiquote 

message: You guys are such hypocrites, this is the most news-speak article I've ever seen. You say you are all about fariness and accuracy, but you don't even allow the man to speak for himself. When he does speak for himself,  you make it out to be vandalism and harrasment. You say he thought there was innacurcies "SO HE WAS A BAD BOY AND VANDALIZED" yet you don't go into any details of the quite accurate criticisms he had of the article, the only reason his edit is even mentioned at all is so you can libel and twist his words and actions more. Any attempt to put fairness into this article will just be reverted by the squad of biased Pixelantes. Anything he has done is swung and turned to make him out to be a villan, the good side is alwayls ignored. Something needs to be done to make this article fair and the stop the squads of people that are obviously biased from editing the article
:His edit was removed because it was an editorial rant stuck into an encyclopeidic entry. Clearing up inaccuracies is one thing. Vandalism is another. Jabrwock 20:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. By the way, you might want to add he is a "presbytarian". However, I'd say he's more extreme Christian (Mormon, Puritian) than Presbytarian.66.209.94.175 21:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page needs major revisions from the top down

message: I don't mind if they're re-written, but I think it's important to note that he has a grudge against Reno, and that he used his position as "Man in Miami" to write accusatory remarks about her... whether he's right or wrong... Jabrwock 21:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reno comments 

message: Hey there,
This category is probably going to be voted for deletion. I think that it was vaguely named and so I plan on renaming it to "Articles edited by involved parties". This does not include iPod owners editing iPod. This includes Steve Case surrupticiously or slantedly editing iPod.
I think this list is important because as Wikipedia grows in size and attention, it is going to continue being a battle ground over public opinion. People and organizations are going to come here, sometimes covertly and sometimes not, and add their propaganda.
Some people believe this category makes the article seem as though it is untrustworthy. This is the opposite of the truth because in being added to this category, the questionable content has been exposed. The article spells out the situation between the editor and the article, making it harder for the press to claim Wikipedia is untrustworthy as a source of information just because Jack Thompson, or anyone, edited their own articles.
Would anyone care to provide feedback at Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_February_16#Category:Articles_edited_by_interested_parties?
Please do not consider this a solicitation for approval. I simply happen to think this category is important to the site and I want to know what others think.Yeago 00:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category: Articles edited by interested parties 

message: I just want to mention i like this new picture of jack much better than the old one (the black and white one, not the 'it' clown one from the vandalism). I didn't even recognize him at first, that old picture must have been really out of date... Melander 02:56, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, having seen the WCPO version for as long as it has been in the article, it looks comically POV. Good work to the fellow who submitted the new version. ╫ ２５ ◀RingADing▶ 14:50, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On a lighter note...