My only objection is that Doom be on the same page as Squeak, Library, Speak, etc. I have no problem with it being on a page that explains that activities w/ violence are not endorsed by OLPC.
I will try to write later w/ my ideas about a policy for violence and adult content On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 16:48 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Send Devel mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Devel digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: [OLPC-Games] Violent games on the OLPC Activities page > (Antoine van Gelder) > 2. Re: Violent games on the OLPC Activities page (Ties Stuij) > 3. Re: Violent games on the OLPC Activities page (Samuel Klein) > 4. Re: Violent games on the OLPC Activities page (Mitch Bradley) > 5. Re: [OLPC-Games] Violent games on the OLPC Activities page > (Carl-Daniel Hailfinger) > 6. New joyride build 1542 (Build Announcer v2) > 7. Re: Violent games on the OLPC Activities page (Bennett Todd) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:53:25 +0200 > From: Antoine van Gelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [OLPC-Games] Violent games on the OLPC Activities page > To: Games for the OLPC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: OLPC Developer's List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Noah Kantrowitz wrote: > > On Jan 17, 2008, at 10:46 AM, Bryan Berry wrote: > > > >> I feel very strongly that violent games should not be associated with > >> OLPC. Albert Cahalan points out that games like Doom can teach > >> geometry > >> and other skills. There are ways to teach those skills w/out involving > >> violence. I work in Nepal, a country recovering from an 11-year civil > >> war. Exposure to more violence, real or virtual, is the last thing > >> most > >> Nepali communities want. > > > > I understand your point, however this is the case, the government in > > Nepal should simply decide not to include the offending material on > > their software image. OLPC is not in the business of censorship or > > content classification, and you have no right to try and remove thing > > from the wiki just because you dislike them. If you are worried > > children will find distasteful things on the internet, perhaps you > > shouldn't give them a laptop. > > > I second and strongly share Bryan's feelings. > > As you pointed out Noah, if children want distasteful things they can > find them elsewhere on the Internet. > > Also Noah - could you please try and show some empathy for the > backgrounds of the people you talk to? Do you understand that large > parts of the rest of the world have not enjoyed the same levels of > stability and safety that your country has ? > > Do you understand that not every person who finds some kinds of content > emotionally hurtful wants to prevent you from exercising your own rights > to access that content to your heart's content in forums which are more > appropriate to that kind of content ? > > Many of us in the other countries have been shot at, had bombs going off > next to us and been brutalized by people with guns that were loaded > with real bullets made of lead that, should you be shot with them, would > blow your head clean off. > > Permanently. > > - antoine > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:09:22 +0100 > From: "Ties Stuij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Violent games on the OLPC Activities page > To: "Hal Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: OLPC Developer's List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Jan 17, 2008 6:37 PM, Hal Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > What's wrong with erring on the safe side with a controversial topic > > > like video game violence in a learning setting like the OLPC project. > > > > That doesn't solve anything. It just pushes the decision point down the > > scale a bit. > > > > Instead of arguing whether something is "violent", we'll be arguing about > > weather it's "violent enough" to be controversial. > > Just to keep on beating that dead horse: > > As was mentioned earlier in this thread, there are always gliding > scales. The solution is not to just forget about them and just allow > everything to keep things simple. To clarify my sentence above, I > don't think the topic of violence in a learning setting is so > controversial. There are little learning packages I know of that > situate themselves in a post-apocalyptic setting with as goal to > murder as many henchmen of Satan as possible. And it's not so > controversial politically, or socially. The only groups who would > endorse a game like this that i can think of would be the arms lobby > and some extreme Christian sects. > > I don't want to generalize but amongst a number of nay-sayers I sense > a strong cencorship fear, while I just see a pragmatic decision to not > include war material in an education project. This is the default > attitude in the educational world methinks. While on the other hand > the chance of a wave of gripping cencorship amongst the XO activities > seems pretty slim to me. > > Still the strongest point to be concidered should be if a certain > class of children might not react well to it. How do vague conceptions > about freedom stack up against that? > > So to me this is a no-brainer. But then again, one might argue that > one shouldn't confuse a developer-wiki with an educational package. > And then you would have me beat! > > Btw, great game, Doom. Ah the memories.. especially on the later > levels when you got the hang of strafing and would comfortably slalom > around the fireballs of whole armies of those doom imps. > > /Ties > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:15:13 -0500 > From: "Samuel Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Violent games on the OLPC Activities page > To: "Bennett Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Bryan Berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, OLPC Developer's List > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Thanks, Chris. > > And thanks to Ties, Bryan, Noah, and all for sharing their coments -- > please use this effort to build a great set of guidelines for what > makes a good activity. This is as good a place as any to reiterate > the need for overall guidelines for what makes for a good or even a > great activity... and to add better structure to the activities pages, > with a page for the best activities and one for public review. > > A serious review of Doom [fast, well-programmed, modularly-skinned, > open source] in line with educational goals would not be wasted -- my > guess is that with some art and music and sound effort, and some AI > tweaks, one could use its engine and most of its levels to produce a > world-class educational game that teaches about 2.5-d motion, careful > control, and with no hint of violence. > > Please see [[Activity guidelines]] on the wiki, seeded with Walter's > comments from October and a few more recent discussions, and update > them with your own contributions and thoughts. One thing is certain : > [[Activities]] is too long, and includes many things we would not > recommend others download or try out, for a variety of reasons. > > Cheers, > SJ > > 2008/1/17 Bennett Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Thank you! > > > > 2008-01-17T19:02:27 Chris Hager: > > > I feel strongly, that there should be a community discussion, *before* > > > removing anything from [[Activities]]. And if something is/should be > > > removed: > > > > > > 1. We should write up some Activity-Guidelines > > > > Those address my concerns. > > > > -Bennett > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Devel mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:18:16 -1000 > From: Mitch Bradley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Violent games on the OLPC Activities page > To: Samuel Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Bryan Berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, OLPC Developer's List > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Samuel Klein wrote: > > > > A serious review of Doom [fast, well-programmed, modularly-skinned, > > open source] in line with educational goals would not be wasted -- my > > guess is that with some art and music and sound effort, and some AI > > tweaks, one could use its engine and most of its levels to produce a > > world-class educational game that teaches about 2.5-d motion, careful > > control, and with no hint of violence. > > > > http://www.snopes.com/humor/nonsense/kangaroo.asp > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:33:14 +0100 > From: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [OLPC-Games] Violent games on the OLPC Activities page > To: Antoine van Gelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: OLPC Developer's List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Games for the OLPC > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi Antoine, > > On 17.01.2008 21:53, Antoine van Gelder wrote: > > Also Noah - could you please try and show some empathy for the > > backgrounds of the people you talk to? Do you understand that large > > parts of the rest of the world have not enjoyed the same levels of > > stability and safety that your country has ? > > [...] > > Many of us in the other countries have been shot at, had bombs going off > > next to us and been brutalized by people with guns that were loaded > > with real bullets made of lead that, should you be shot with them, would > > blow your head clean off. > > > > Unfortunately I lack information about your backgrund, which results in > the following question: > You use the word "us" very often. Please tell the list members which > country you have lived in where bombs went off next to you. > I'm trying to understand you better. > > Thanks. > > Regards, > Carl-Daniel > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:36:18 -0500 (EST) > From: Build Announcer v2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: New joyride build 1542 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > http://xs-dev.laptop.org/~cscott/olpc/streams/joyride/build1542 > > Changes in build 1542 from build: 1540 > > Size delta: 0M > > -kernel 2.6.22-20080110.1.olpc.940c801838dbaf2 > +kernel 2.6.22-20080117.1.olpc.a0ca568e912c1c5 > > ------ > This mail was automatically generated > See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride-pkgs.html for aggegrate logs > See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride_vs_update1.html for a > comparison > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:46:17 +0000 > From: Bennett Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Violent games on the OLPC Activities page > To: Ties Stuij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: OLPC Developer's List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > 2008-01-17T21:09:22 Ties Stuij: > > > > What's wrong with erring on the safe side with a controversial > > > > topic like video game violence in a learning setting like the > > > > OLPC project. > > [...] > > As was mentioned earlier in this thread, there are always gliding > > scales. The solution is not to just forget about them and just allow > > everything to keep things simple. To clarify my sentence above, I > > don't think the topic of violence in a learning setting is so > > controversial. > > Let's get a concrete definition of "violence" and I think the > disagreement will fade right out. > > Would a game like pacman count? How about asteroids? Missile > command? I'd probably feel good about a definition that could > exclude missile command, that made me feel ill the first time I saw > it. > > What I'm uncomfortable with is a lack of definition, any activity > that could expose a child to anything that anybody feels is too > violent should be evicted, or at least chased off into a ghetto. > > > There are little learning packages I know of that situate > > themselves in a post-apocalyptic setting with as goal to murder as > > many henchmen of Satan as possible. > > I missed Doom, didn't know anything about it. Sounds like a good > candidate for putting in a separate place from educational games for > young children. Can we define any sort of objective criteria --- > including "a majority of people expressing an opinion agree" (which > Doom has certainly achieved here). > > > And it's not so controversial politically, or socially. > > Doom no, it appears. But: > > > The only groups who would endorse a game like this that i can > > think of would be the arms lobby and some extreme Christian sects. > > It's folks in extreme [religion] sects, and other "my beliefs win, > agree or die" types that worry me the most. > > > I don't want to generalize but amongst a number of nay-sayers I sense > > a strong cencorship fear, while I just see a pragmatic decision to not > > include war material in an education project. > > Can we get a concrete definition of "war material"? > > It's not censorship, OLPC owns this microphone, they get to decide > how it's used. I'm not saying Doom belongs on the same page as > SimCity and Speak. Given your above description it shouldn't. I'm > asking for _some_ kind of line between the two. The recent DVD > release of the first season of Sesame Street warns that it isn't > appropriate for young children. That creeps me out. > > How do we define the line between Doom and SpaceWars? > > I see the Activities page currently requests no "strongly violent" > games. Is that clear enough? > > -Bennett > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 189 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20080117/4210489d/attachment.pgp > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > > > End of Devel Digest, Vol 23, Issue 111 > ************************************** _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
