Does "Muslim Massacre" game show a need for Internet regulation?


Recommended Posts

I will not debate the content of your signatures as this is not a political forum, but they do seem awfully large and are enough for me to block photobucket.

Not to mention sexist... ;)

250px ? 170px falls within the guideline of 550 x 170 and 50K. My sig meets those requirements./

sethos:

http://uk.gizmodo.com/2007/07/08/sony_says...ally_sorry.html

They're never going to do that again.

I couldn't find proper screens but here you go

http://www.itreviews.co.uk/games/g305.htm The Mark uses Mosques

Hidden and Dangerous 2 is a nother game that comes to mind.

I'm sure there are plenty of Counter Strike maps.

As I said before, it's all about respect. I have the freedom to say what I want, that's great, but it doesn't give me the right to hurt others.

250px ? 170px falls within the guideline of 550 x 170 and 50K. My sig meets those requirements./

I think the size includes any extra text outside of the picture(s) as well, and thus you break the rules. not fully sure though.

I think the size includes any extra text outside of the picture(s) as well, and thus you break the rules. not fully sure though.

Even that will not exceed 550x170. My entire sig is not larger than the image example shown below:

post-4080-1139004840.png

Even that will not exceed 550x170. My entire sig is not larger than the image example shown below:

post-4080-1139004840.png

We seem to be grasping at straws here people but you have to admit the image itself is 170 so with the text underneath it obviously does go over.

As I said before, it's all about respect. I have the freedom to say what I want, that's great, but it doesn't give me the right to hurt others.

There is no law requiring anyone to respect anyone, disrespect and ill will are not illegal. Hate isn't illegal and hate does not always/necessarily equal "hurt". As someone else posted, you can't pick and chose what qualifies as free speech...

Looks like the site has been taken down, which is too bad because I would've liked to try it.

There is too much political corectness in the world today, and the internet is still full of censorship.

Most games (both retail and online) involving violence has an enemy such as Russia, China, Middle East, Japan, England or America.

I suggest people who find those games offensive add the website addresses to their HOSTs file and move on to something more to their tastes.

Leave the internet for those adult enough to police themselves.

How about this: http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/default.pl?id=317

It was written about 6 years ago. I don't see anyone getting uppity about that. Except for maybe 15 million or whatever Israelis.

Why do these middle eastern games always look like crap?

but when a Church was used in that other video game, Sony were forced to stop it.

No, they wasn't. The church could have possibly slapped them about abit for using the image and/or layout of the Manchester church without their permission, but if Sony had used a generic church/cathedral in it's game then they could have done absolutely zilch.

We don't live in a fair world but I'm very glad to see that there are a lot of neowinians who have shown that they understand that wrong is wrong.

No, wrong is what you define as wrong. Again, you can't just take away someone's right to free speech simply because you believe they are wrong.

I think all religion is a waste of time and everyone who believes in it is wrong, but I don't think they should have the right to believe and practise in it simply because I think it's wrong.

As I said before, it's all about respect. I have the freedom to say what I want, that's great, but it doesn't give me the right to hurt others.

Unless you live in a country where hate speech again certain groups is restricted, then yes it does.

We seem to be grasping at straws here people but you have to admit the image itself is 170 so with the text underneath it obviously does go over.

No, my image is not 550x170. It is 250px ? 170px >

There are larger sigs in this forum than mine. But if it bothers you people so much, I will remove it.

No, my image is not 550x170. It is 250px ? 170px >

There are larger sigs in this forum than mine.

Yes, the IMAGE is 170x in hight, but you ALSO have text which adds to the hight, meaning it's higher than 170x.

Just because it's only 250x long, the hight rule still goes.

I suppose sometimes development takes a back seat to jihad.

Haha:rofl::

Yes, the IMAGE is 170x in hight, but you ALSO have text which adds to the hight.

Just because it's only 250x long, the hight rule still goes.

Haha :rofl:

It's gone now so you can get back to the topic and leave my sig alone.

Sadly a lot of people have used the term 'freedom' to mean that we have the right to disrespect each other, but why?

It's all about respect at the end of the day.

...

And if you want to respect somebody you can. Of course you have the right not to respect people, of course you have to right to say as much.

You can't act as a morality police, telling people what they can and can't think.

well the internet is regulated to the extent of the law that applies in the territory that the servers and the business or person is based.

so if this were set up in the US it would allowed because taking it down would violate the persons free speech.

The maturity level on this thread has dropped to the point were you are discussing about a signature. :huh:

I see it as this: You cant ask fro freedom of speech if you are not willing to give it to those you dont agree with, doest matter how much you dislike it.

In the end of the day I still dont understand people that get offended by this get angry. If I dont like something I simply avoid it, I have better things to do, but I guess thats a hard concept to swallow.

The maturity level on this thread has dropped to the point were you are discussing about a signature. :huh:

I see it as this: You cant ask fro freedom of speech if you are not willing to give it to those you dont agree with, doest matter how much you dislike it.

In the end of the day I still dont understand people that get offended by this get angry. If I dont like something I simply avoid it, I have better things to do, but I guess thats a hard concept to swallow.

Yes it has, I did not bring it up.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Bluesky COO warns social media regulations could destroy competition from small startups by Paul Hill Fears that increasing government control of social media risks regulatory capture by the biggest social media firms were raised again recently. Bluesky’s chief operating officer said in an interview that social media bans for children and tighter regulations for social media firms risk creating a world where there are only a few social media platforms run by companies with the deepest pockets. Regulations on social media firms have been very lax since they appeared for mainstream users in the 2000’s. This gave Meta, Snapchat, and Google time to build up their user bases and get entrenched, with Meta being the most successful. Now that Meta has succeeded, it has been attempting regulatory capture. By pushing for more regulations of social media, Meta hopes to make it more difficult for rivals to challenge it. For its part, it doesn’t need to worry about the cost of regulation because it has a lot of money to spend, whereas startups do not. Speaking to CNBC, Rose Wang, Bluesky’s chief operating officer, said: “I support the protection and the safety of youth, the question that we have then is at what cost, because essentially what I’m scared of is in the long term, we’re headed to a world where there’s about three to five platforms, and extreme heavy regulation of those platforms, and basically the whole compliance teams of these platforms are 10 times the size of our entire team. So, basically, we’re living in a world where it’s almost impossible for smaller entrants to come in and build healthier spaces. These platforms have led to a place where the bottom line is the thing that drives what they do... so I understand why governments have to step in and regulate, because the platforms have done nothing right.” She said that while she is not against regulation, there needs to be more channels between the small to mid-sized players and regulators to help protect them. She says that big tech players, on the other hand, “who we know are circumventing regulation,” need to be regulated. Essentially, the Bluesky position is one of nuance, rather than absolutes. While Bluesky’s proposal may preserve competition in the social media space, it still doesn’t address the massive privacy implications these age verification measures introduce, such as handing over sensitive identity documents to access age-gated content. Source: CNBC
    • it dosnt support onprem exchange. it dosnt support mapi-calls. the views are all worse/limited. its slower. it cant see public folder calendars. we already have webmail. the list of other missing features is pretty huge but i only see it when customers call to say their email isnt working, and 9/10 times its cause they accidentality changed to outlooknew(new). Hold the line everyone!
    • yeah, this looks beautiful. Damn this winter's going to be great.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      249
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      71
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      70
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!