Recent posts by petesahooligan on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

Making some forums only available to L5 accounts would solve a lot of the problems.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

UKHooligan: Plagiarism.


Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

I haven’t had a static IP address since I ditched my DSL line in favor of cable 10 years ago. IP blocking is problematic… but this isn’t about enforcement, it’s about compliance.

Vika, I hadn’t really thought it through much but I imagine an IID kind of being like a badge that you would wear while engaging in SOME online social activities… forums, gaming, that sort of thing.

Of course, any activity that you feel might be controversial or sensitive… be it going to a porn site or trading knots with strangers… you’d naturally opt to go incognito.

And after dwelling on the solution as it pertains specifically to Kong, I’d totally verify my ID with Kong staff (not volunteers) if it meant that my account could receive a publicly seen “verified” icon. The Verified icon would mean that I volunteered to have my personal identity privately associated with my Kong account. My personal ID would NOT be seen by any fellow Kong users or volunteers (and it probably would be easy if it weren’t seen by humans at all).

What it would mean from an experiential standpoint is that some users would be verified and some would not. Verified accounts would probably get more respect from the community than unverified ones. It wouldn’t prevent unverified account holders from wreaking havoc, but it could make it easier to identify those individuals that had registered using disposable email accounts.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Beauty and Survival

Yeah, every single one of you motherfuckers have annoyed me before.

But that doesn’t mean that I don’t value the exchange and respect your opinions… even when they’re completely misguided, underinformed, mean-spirited, insular, defensive, arrogant, dismissive, self-righteous, petty, semantic, and wrong.

Seriously though… I like being challenged on intellectual matters and most of the 8 or 10 SD regulars are perfectly capable of doing that.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Question for the forum

Plagiarized from elsewhere. Cite your sources, OP (on your next alt).

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Beauty and Survival

That was my take-away, too. I was inspired by the response and spent some time with it and eventually got nowhere. I would have liked him to expand on it but then Captain Conflict threw out a shiny grenade that I had to play with.

I hear you about the subtle distinctions between annoying SD regulars that deliver content (even if it’s disagreeable) and those annoying SD regulars that deliver bullshit (because it’s intentionally disagreeable).

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Kosovo!

Ç’kemi Dario, I spent some time in Mostar and have traveled around the area.

Nga je?

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

Zaminick is busy trying to break a system that isn’t invented. :)

Backing up a little to the meta-issue of trust online—and having nowhere else relevant to share this—I came across an interesting performance art bit done in the 1970s.

In a nutshell, the artist (a woman) stood attentive but unmoving for 6 hours and allowed the public to do anything to her. On the table nearby were nice things, neutral things, and violent things. At first people were timid and did “nice” things to her… put a scarf around her neck. As time went on people became more invasive… taking her top off, pointing a gun at her head, and so on.

As soon as the six hours were up, she gathered her things. The gathered crowd, fearing a confrontation, quickly dispersed.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Beauty and Survival

To be fair, Jantonaitis, the idea of resurrecting a dead thread to share your amusement at my responding to trolls is, in essence, responding to trolls.

I didn’t respond to the first reply because (frankly) I didn’t really understand it.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Time Capsule

The thing that fascinates me about seeing all those old games is that I really never knew that they existed… or that that many existed.

I grew up poor by my neighborhood’s standards in a poor neighborhood by the city’s standards… but not the worst neighborhood. But some of my friends had toys and games and such. It was only until the late 1970s that I really got hooked on the arcade experience… I spent a LOT of quarters in the arcade.

But even then my experience was limited by what the arcade had, and of course everyone knew all the games though we all had our favorites. Bezerker (and years later its sexy younger sister Robotron were my favorites. I could literally play Robotron for an hour or more on a single quarter—you start with 3 lives and got a new one after every 25,000 points… or about every 2 or 3 levels).

That’s about when Atari consoles started invading every home… and the link between the Donkey Kong in the arcade and the Donkey Kong in the living room was made. By then I was fully immersed in D&D, skateboarding, BMX, and shooting. Everything but skateboarding termed out.

In high school I started entertaining the thought of saving up for an Amiga. After calculated the prices of different configurations and factoring summer jobs and piece work, I determined I could buy one after 2 years (about $1,200 if I recall in 1980 dollars… about $2,500 today or so). It had a MB of memory!

I never owned a console until I was older than the demographic. In fact, I think I bought my first console for my kids. (PS1 or GameCube)

Computer gaming nabbed me, though. That started with the Ultima series, and eventually Ultima Online… it was a rudimentary (by today’s standards) quest-style RPG… lot of running back and forth across the universe fighting things and leveling up inch by inch.

I did a few MUDs and MUSHes but really enjoyed the random social aspects of BBSes when they first emerged. But UO and Everquest grabbed me good… and fortunately most of my RL friends that were also playing quickly leveled past me and I was left behind, so I lost interest. (Best thing to happen to me ever.)

And I was doing a lot of competitive playing in Quake, Doom, Half-Life, Myth, and those early shooters. We had clans and practices and LAN-parties and all that shit. Super fun.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

Ha! I spent a lot of time on Neopets. I worked on a card game based on the property and ended up spending a good year just growing an account there. It was fun!

Yeah, introducing young people to younger sites that are well-moderated is probably a good method. It exposes those young people to other people around the world but with limited bandwidth that would catch most abusive behavior.

What’s up with all the asshole adults then?!

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Time Capsule

I know we have some older folks in this forum… or young people that are old-at-heart.

I came across a fun magazine archive recently. In that archive is a collection of Crash! magazine. Crash was a gaming magazine from the 1980s.

Video (computer) games were just being introduced and Crash was all over it. You’ll find editorial gems like (and I’m not making this up, it’s awesome!):

Joysticks! A boon or a pain? And which one to buy!

Shoot ’Em Up! Invaders/Galaxians — we compare some versions!

And so on!

The archive is PDFs so you can see all of the awesome, old-school computer game art… and from the ’80s!

Dig it.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Sexualisation and Sexual Objectification in Video Games

Years ago I was the art director for a magazine called Dragon. Its focus was the Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game. As the new art director I was eager to exert my fingerprints on the magazine’s look-and-feel. I was afforded the opportunity to write the editorial of my inaugural issue. I called that editorial (paraphrase): No More Chainmail Bikinis.

I went on to announce my commitment to a more visceral, a more believable D&D… starting with (among other things) ridiculously skimpy armor for busty warrior-vixens.

Man, I got a SHIT-TON of hate mail!

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

Touché. I might be convinced.

However, I’d assert still that young people are especially susceptible to conformist influence, and when they see that the internet rewards shitty, outlandish behavior… well, it works.

Before the internet those kids had their own neighborhoods—and their own neighbors—to help shape what they would ultimately become as adults.

I hear you and agree that people ultimately follow the ethical path that is true to their being… whether it’s being a troublesome trouble-maker or something a little more enlightened and inspired.

I also agree that those great people that have inspired us in the past were not generally inspiring to everyone during their day. It was only after they were long gone did society as a whole feel their influence (and recognize them for it). That’s kind of what I’m aiming for; that in 200 years people look back and say, “he wasn’t that stupid after all!”

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

You’re right that people aren’t born with behavioral tendencies, but they’re pretty well and set by the time they venture online,

But you see, they aren’t. Children these days are more watched-over than ever before. And that’s not just my tired “kids these days” schtick. Children are shuttled from home to school to practice to home then supervised while do their homework and review tomorrow’s itinerary and are then provided 1.5 hours of play time before bedtime.

When the teenager gets their first bedroom computer or smart phone, they are instantly exposed to the world. It is abrupt and comes with absolutely no playbook… it’s do or die. And you can’t NOT play, either… not if you expect to maintain your place among a group of friends… not if you want to be a leader.

A lot of kids rely on the shock-and-awe strategy and it sets a tone on the internet that feeds off the tone of our political journalism, and that inflames the parents and the whole fucked up mess reinforces a world view that it’s all going to hell.

Distasterpiece Theater in one dramatic act. Hang on to your ethics, kiddies! It’s gonna be a bumpy ride.

I’m not down for religion, but the thing that I like about it is that a person is accountable for their actions in the most existential sense. (Nevermind the hypocrites… this is unpolluted idealistic abstraction.) Philosophers and deep thinkers and prophets and bold religious leaders and even politicians once inspired us. And now who are we inspired by? Why is everyone can agree on how terrible it all is—how terrible we are—yet we cannot even come close to agreeing on what we’re doing right… what we want to be?

That could start, I think, when a young person first encounters society as a whole…at least as far as the internet is concerned. This is an opportunity to shape expectations.

AFTERTHOUGHT: You’re absolutely right that I can be a prick… especially to Karma because I know that somehow we actually sort of like each other, we’re a lot alike, and I take some perverse delight in getting under his skin a little bit, (but I also want him to know that when I argue with him I’m actually engaged and sincerely participating). With Vanguarde it’s that he came gunning for me right off the bat with personal threats… and that’s over the line in any situation. I don’t like that at all and I don’t forget that it happened, ever, or who was behind it. Not once was I ever sincerely mad at him… he never made me upset (not like Karma)… but I always tried to create the phrases that I thought would irritate him the most. No holds barred? Okay, no holds barred.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

I unequivocally disagree, Kasic.

I believe it’s just the opposite; when a young person sees shitty behavior happening online (and all the excitement that ensues), they feel like it’s appropriate to behave in the same way… or that the behavior is normal for the internet.

I’m confident that the people that express the most offensive racist messages on comment threads would never say anything like that in person. They’re just kids trying to act tough… cowards, mostly, looking for a place to be powerful (without incurring any of the risk associated with true power).

And by kids I also mean emotionally stunted adults. There’s plenty of them, too.

People aren’t born with behavioral tendencies; they learn them… and young people used to venture from their homes in small geographical increments… the neighborhood over, their first public bus ride with their friends, and so on. Nowadays young people are instantly exposed to a massive, boisterous community online where everyone is vying for attention all at once. For a young person with little world experience it can be daunting to try to be heard… but if you drop the N-bomb into a crowded forum, BOOM! Instant notoriety!

Trolling, I believe, is an extension of that same behavior.

What is the emotional driver for trolling? What reward does someone get from antagonizing people that they don’t know? Are they meting out justice over imagined insults? Or they righteous, or do they know they’re being assholes?

I know that I can be an asshole… self-righteous (guilty), opinionated (guilty), argumentative (guilty)… but I can also be compassionate and respond well to kindness. I don’t see that kind of human flexibility in most internet warriors.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

Yeah, that’s right. I’m a proponent of transparency on the internet and feel that the default should be “transparent.” When you’re ready to hit your favorite porn site or get into a little mischief, you turn anonymous.

People currently opt-in to accountability. You are accountable when you purchase something, for example… accountable to fulfill the sale or to pay for the goods or services.

With sites that imply some sort of social contract, such as the ubiquitous “don’t be an asshole” clause, users are sort of left to their own judgement. Clearly a site that is specifically designed to attract younger people is going to have more instances of dubious behavior than sites with an older demographic. (I hear the Rotary Club forums rarely have issues with trolls.)

While disruptive, attention-seeking behavior may be more common with younger ages, it doesn’t really help in seeking a solution… particularly when a site is intending to attract the very age group that is most responsible for cases of trolling.

I think elsewhere there was a discussion about “Post Count Walls” that hid certain forums until an account had a sizable “investment” in it… # of posts or duration since creation, that sort of thing… but I was thinking about solutions on a larger scale.

In my work I end up reading a LOT of online newspaper articles… maybe 15 or 20 a week, on average. The articles are often hot topics, and if you were to gauge the quality of human interactions based solely on the comments underneath, you’d be the first person to push the big red button on humanity. People can be super shitty when they think they’re anonymous, and they do real harm to our cultural environment as a result. It sucks and it bums me out.

I understand that we’re still in the Wild West phase of the internet, but Jesus Christ I wish people could step in with a little more dignity and mutual respect.

EDIT: You like those ideas, DoomLord?

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

Then how about this question, IoD.

Is there inherent benefit in having social site user accounts qualified in some way?

If so, how could they be qualified, and to what benefit?

Sites like Amazon do it all the time… “Premium Vendor” or whatever. That level of accountability helps those vendors express their commitment to customer service and, presumably, integrity.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

I hadn’t considered it, IoD.

I’d only considered the social “integrity” benefits. For meta-gaming I think you would only want to have one primary “personal” account and your alternate accounts would be associated in some way… but wouldn’t be verified.

Or—alternatively—for social sites like Kong you might want to verify several accounts and they would all be publicly linked in some way, like you said.

Usually this is currently accomplished by creating accounts like “Petesahoolagain” or “Repetesahooligan.”

EDIT: One good measure on Kong forums is the post count. Any account with over 1,000 posts is generally a good sign that the user has invested considerable time into their experience. It would be neat to see a breakdown of post counts to gauge a person’s allegiances.

Petesahooligan 1642 posts
28% Serious Discussion
65% The Arts
5% Kongregate
2% Off Topic

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

Kasic, I don’t know that I completely agree.

There are lots of ways that we validate each other online. When I see someone posting prolifically in SD and they made their Kong account within the last few days, I’m pretty sure it’s an alt. And if it’s an alt, it generally gives me a little bit of mistrust.

Yes, I do agree that there’s an attraction for anonymity… and the premise above wouldn’t compete with it. It would merely be an option where the presence of anonymous individuals (like any uncontrolled social site) had the potential to disrupt other peoples’ experience with the site.

Hackers would be able to get your information from you IDD but the IDD wouldn’t contain any sensitive information per se… once the validation was complete, the verification data would be removed. There wouldn’t be anything to steal EXCEPT the link to the person’s name. And even then the hacker would need to put together the information from there.

There’s also a consideration for the degree of security a site might need. Clearly, logging into your bank account requires a different degree of security than logging into Kong.

Again, the actual personal information isn’t shared. It’s merely some kind of easy identifier that rides with your account name that says, “I’m verified.” Sites could actually do this themselves if they saw value in it. Maybe it’s an option when you sign up for something like Kong… “would you like to verify your personal ID?”

Trolls wouldn’t participate, but a site could certainly provide areas for verified users only, or verified users may find a greater degree of trust and openness with each other than those unverified accounts.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / 3rd death directly related to cannabis "Consumables" in Colorado

Clearly there are some significant benefits to the legalization of recreational marijuana. Namely, tax revenue and reduction in pot-related arrests. For states, they work well together to return millions of dollars into the general fund.

Colorado is claiming about $44,000,000 in tax revenue from pot. Washington is the only other state to have legalized marijuana but doesn’t have a full year assessment yet. Colorado’s population is 5.3-million while Washington is 7-million. Both state’s median household income are equivalent so that shouldn’t be a factor. (Both states offer some of the nation’s best skiing and snowboarding… coincidence?!)

The negative health impacts are going to have to be significant before a state will be willing to let that revenue go. (Look at cigarettes… even smokers usually don’t like to smoke and it’s STILL legal!) In fact, in spite of Colorado’s tax revenue from pot being less than anticipated, it’s still a huge amount of money that is causing other states to encourage pot advocates to get organized.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Arizona State Senator Suggests That Church Be Mandatory


I understand your passion, Karma, and I get it. I admire it.

What I was hoping to get from you was to hear what your tipping point is for armed revolution, or do you use the term “reach for my guns” metaphorically?

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

Don’t you have better things to do with your life?

EDIT: Thank you, Mod!

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Arizona State Senator Suggests That Church Be Mandatory

Dude (Karma), you’re really annoying. I even provided the caveat that I agreed with you and you still went ballistic.

I don’t want to bring up old beef either and wasn’t trying to, but then you introduce your response to the topic with three paragraphs that basically characterize my position for me… and thanks for that, jerkus! Maybe just focus on sharing who YOU are and leave who I am to me. Thanks, bud!


The reason I asked you that question is because of the interesting collision between a person’s compliance with moral or ethical standards and the threshold where it becomes an armed conflict. People revolt for all kinds of reasons, and for you (apparently) a reasonable catalyst would be in some requirement of religious conformity.

I’m actually not even that interested anymore. This whole forum is beginning to smell like assholes.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Concept: Internet ID Verification

Oh brother.