Flowers for Jack: If you can't beat him, send him pretty things

by Ross Miller on Jan 23rd 2006 11:00PM

Sure, you many not like Jack Thompson - you quite possibly downright loathe him (many Joystiq comments have expressed such strong emotions) - but every Grinch has a beating heart, just waiting to be warmed. A group on LiveJournal, Flowers for Jack, wants to do just that.

With all the money they collect ($483.16 as of tonight), Flowers for Jack will send anti-game activist Jack Thompson the largest bushel of "pretty, pretty flowers" to him possible, along with this letter, signed by anyone who wishes to add their name. The letter, while not finished, will "touch (but not aggravate with)" the following:

Some sort of apology for the less-cordial correspondences he gets from less mature gamers.
Finding his proper stated agenda (keep violence from children, or ban games entirely?)
The word Pixelante, and how its being used now.
His overall stance on the NIMF (He badmouthed them soon after they sent him the C&D, but they still have similar agendas)
Presidential candidancy in 2008: just a rumor?
what we can do to maintain lines of serious dialogue with him?

Those who wish to be added to the letter can send their information (first name, last name, city, state, country, and so on) to flowersforjack@gmail.com. If you are willing to donate any money to the cause, as well, click on one of the "make a donation" links scattered about their main page. Their mission is to be both "civil and silly" - nothing wrong with that.

[Thanks, Brody Brooks and Andy]

[Update: I am a grammar king - if by king you mean loads of grammar errors. Fixed!]

Source

Reader Comments (53)

Not necessarily, Revo. Check back through some of the items the muppet's posted on...

www.joystiq.com/2005/10/18/jack-strikes-back-penny-arcade-in-legal-trouble/

www.joystiq.com/2005/10/21/jack-thompson-calls-for-a-truce/

The latter in particular... read it from Chris K's post (#21) onwards. Made for interesting reading.

Could Conrad & Co confirm that the poster of items 18, 22, 23 and 25 on this thread are from everyone's least favourite sheet stain, please? It would at least confirm that he's edging ever closer to a complete emotional and nervous breakdown (get ready to crack open the Tizer).

I wasn't totally serious when I said that I didn't believe he was for real, but I certainly had my doubts. Thanks for clearing that up though.

Since you, Jack Thompson, offered to fix some things about my post, allow me to do the same thing with yours.

Post #22: "I've represented parents whose daughters were shot and killed by a gamer in Paducah. Have you done that? No."

Response: You're absolutely right. I have, in fact, never shot girls, or anybody else for that matter. I have, however, shot pop cans, with the pop cans coming out just fine in the end, thanks to my horrible aim. That little experience taught me that just because I can shoot a gun in a game doesn't mean I can actually shoot a gun.

Post #23: "Yes, I've played the games. I'm astonished that you would assume I know nothing about what I know everything about."

Response: Ok, so you've played games. Big freakin' deal. The only problem is that you said you have played games, not video games. Scrabble, Candyland, and Mousetrap don't count as video games. And your second sentence I find mind-numbing. If you are a lawyer, you should at least be able to follow the rules of the English language.

And as for post #25, you basically proved that you are not above using childish pranks yourself, like you said we gamers do in post #22.

So how can I sum this up? I think you already did in post #22..."Pathetic. Jack Thompson."

Also, there's no need to put your name in again. It already shows up at the bottom of the post.

Previous 50 Comments