Support NeoGAF

[Ghost]

This thread is really bad. Anyone familiar with the issues should know why this news is a bad thing for video games. As has been said in countless places within the video game media, games shouldn't be placed in the same arena as porn and drugs. It belongs with other media forms. The ESRB is a fine self-regulation tool, and with time and storefront cooperation become as well followed as the movie industry's. We should be supporting the ESRB, not this bill, which hopefully won't pass into law.

Why wait for the retailers (bar bestbuy) to get off their asses and co-operate with the ESRB? The other thread said 42% of underage kids got sold games they shouldnt have. Something should be done to stop that.

Sure the ERSB (from the looks of it)is doing great at advising parents what they should and shouldnt buy for their kids (70% take the rating into consideration) but thats just one side of the problem if kids can go out and buy the unsuitable content for themselves.

 

[CajoleJuice]

This is like the government stepping in to legislate bans and suspensions for steroid use in Major League Baseball. The MLB and the players union showed that they weren't going to make an harsh penalties for steroid use, so the government stepped in. The other leagues already had decent testing and penalties in place.

Since the videogame industry isn't policing itself like the movie and recording industries, I guess the government feels it should step in. Kids under 17 shouldn't have easy access to games like GTA. It should be like rated-R movies where you need a parent's consent.

 

[elostyle]

This is a good thing because if minors are not allowed to buy them anymore then you can't keep blaming the game companies.

 

[Scrow]

This is a good thing because if minors are not allowed to buy them anymore then you can't keep blaming the game companies.

bingo

this may also mean that developers can put even more explicit content in adult-themed games because the risk of getting slapped with a law suit will be significantly reduced, if by law children are not meant to play the title in the first place.

 

[P90]

You.

As a gamer.

Approve this!?

*Slams head onto desk*

Ugh. I mean, Do you think this is logical?

Don't you think the blame is on the parents? Hypocrisy all over.

As a kid you never went to the mall without your parents and bought stuff? Maybe that is why you don't see the logic. Personally, I'm not sure this bill is necessary as it is written. I'd suggest just making the ESRB standards stricter. Less legal fuss.

 

[Speevy]

I'm an adult without any children, so I don't really care either way.

 

[P90]

This is like the government stepping in to legislate bans and suspensions for steroid use in Major League Baseball. The MLB and the players union showed that they weren't going to make an harsh penalties for steroid use, so the government stepped in. The other leagues already had decent testing and penalties in place.

Since the videogame industry isn't policing itself like the movie and recording industries, I guess the government feels it should step in. Kids under 17 shouldn't have easy access to games like GTA. It should be like rated-R movies where you need a parent's consent.

I have seen parents buying GTA for their 7 to 8 year old kid. The clerk warned the parents and the parents didn't care. I would surmise these cases are out of the ordinary, but maybe I am wrong.

 

[Scottlarock]

*sells pretend take two/rockstar stocks*

 

[shoplifter]

This is like the government stepping in to legislate bans and suspensions for steroid use in Major League Baseball. The MLB and the players union showed that they weren't going to make an harsh penalties for steroid use, so the government stepped in. The other leagues already had decent testing and penalties in place.

Not quite. MLB has what amounts to a granted monopoly, so the government has a greater amount of pull.

 

[P90]

Not quite. MLB has what amounts to a granted monopoly, so the government has a greater amount of pull.

Yes, that analogy is not that strong, but his next paragraph is right on the mark as a proper analogy:

Since the videogame industry isn't policing itself like the movie and recording industries

 

[PkunkFury]

I have seen parents buying GTA for their 7 to 8 year old kid. The clerk warned the parents and the parents didn't care. I would surmise these cases are out of the ordinary, but maybe I am wrong.

So have I. It almost makes me physically sick that a parent could be that irresponsible. I have nothing against these games being made, but kids should not be playing them.

 

[luxsol]

This is like the government stepping in to legislate bans and suspensions for steroid use in Major League Baseball. The MLB and the players union showed that they weren't going to make an harsh penalties for steroid use, so the government stepped in. The other leagues already had decent testing and penalties in place.

Since the videogame industry isn't policing itself like the movie and recording industries, I guess the government feels it should step in. Kids under 17 shouldn't have easy access to games like GTA. It should be like rated-R movies where you need a parent's consent.

The video game industry already does a great job at policing itself; the ESRB has been doing a great job so far. There has only been one big mistake so far, and that was hidden away and unplayable (through normal means) like so many other unfinished parts that many other game discs contain.

It's the retailers who aren't doing their job, nor the parents. Retailers rarely ask for IDs when a kid buys a game, but it's the same way with R rated movies.
It's not against the law for a minor to watch or be sold an R rated movie. No M rated game contains more mature content than any R rated movie, nor does an M rated game affect a minor's (or ANYONE'S) mind anymore than an R-rated movie does. So why should M-rated games be subject to a federal law?

There is no damn good reason besides appeasing ignorant parents and, in their minds, proving that games are worse than movies (or any other media) that can negativelly (or positively affecting violent tendencies) affect a person's mind.
This is why a federal law like this is dangerous.
This law would put M-rated games in the same category as drugs, guns and pornography. And it seems a lot of people who are in favor of this bill seem to find these dangerous for children. Do you people really think games are just as dangerous?

This is a good thing because if minors are not allowed to buy them anymore then you can't keep blaming the game companies.

No, they'll still blame game companies anyway because there are many games that aren't M-rated that contain violence and blood, which is what parents complain about in the first place.
Battlefield 2, for instance, is a Teen rated game.

bingo

this may also mean that developers can put even more explicit content in adult-themed games because the risk of getting slapped with a law suit will be significantly reduced, if by law children are not meant to play the title in the first place.

The ESRB, as it is now, already allows them to do that. =P

 

[KINGMOKU]

Dude. You don't need the information.

I KNOW people who played GTA under the age of 17...

I have a brother, and I happen to be a friend of his best friend....

They both were 15/16 when I brought in GTASA to my home on launch day...Now, before that...GTAIII, and Vice City were both in the hands of my brother since the games came out, since I bought both at launch.

Now, both are 16/17.

You have no point to stand on, at all. This is good.

FFS. You sound as dumb as a box of rocks. What's the problem with saying minors cannot have adult games?

 

[hahahax]

They should just stop allowing sex in games.

 

[Vitten]

I think it might be bad for games. Let's not fool ourselves: right now most gaming companies know very well that a lot of parents out there couldn't give a damn what their children are playing so they have no problem cranking up the violence to a 16 or 18+ level knowing that this does't hurt sales that much.

Once legislation steps in to actually prohibit sales of said games to minors I think you'll experience the same effect with movies where everything becomes 'PG13-fied' to cater to the biggest possible audience

 

[dskillzhtown]

Such a non-issue.
Anyone who finds offense with the government regulating sales to minors of adult material (like GTA) must be a fucking alarmist douche. This stuff isn't meant to be sold to minors at all. Actually enforcing age restrictions isn't going to mean games are censored, or worse off. It'll mean they'll get played by their intended audiences or parents will buy the games for them. No big changeup.

I agree. If the game industry and stores policed themselves better, none of this would be happening. How many times have you seen kids in EB buying GTA? I even saw a few buy The Guy Game. The stores might actually pay attention to the ratings now.

The deal with the government investigating ESRB is directly related to Rockstar. ESRB gave the game a M when there was AO content in the game. So once again it appears the gaming industry can't police itself. Actually I think that the ESRB will become more like the movie rating system, alot more consistent at the end of all this.

I don't see what the big problem is. There have been bills that were totally aimed at controlling content, this seems not in that direction at all.

 

[luxsol]

I really don't think that law will pass anyway. If the game industry lawyers were smart they could just do the same thing the movie industry did.

Federal courts have established that government cannot
enact laws granting legal enforcement to the private ratings of the
Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). In MPAA v. Spector, 315
F.Supp. 824 (ED Pa. 1970), the court dealt with a Pennsylvania law
making it a crime to permit a child to see a movie rated "R" or "X"
under the MPAA scheme. The court held the law unconstitutional

http://www.spectacle.org/cs/library.html

 

[luxsol]

What's the problem with saying minors cannot have adult games?

There is no problem until it's regulated by law.

There is no damn good reason [to have such a law] besides appeasing ignorant parents and, in their minds, proving that games are worse than movies (or any other media) that can negativelly (or positively affecting violence) affect a person's mind.

 

[DenogginizerOS]

that's mom and dad's job...not the government

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH-Men! When Hil and Joe look back in 2006 and 2008. they will regret this move.

 

[aparisi2274]

So they're going to stop kids from buying games that they shouldn't be allowed to buy. Where's the problem?

Yeah I dont see a problem here. If you are over 17, then no issues...

If you try to go to an R rated movie, and you are under 17, u arent getting in... Same should go with videogames...

I agree with some people that it should fall on the parents, but unlike movies, where parents take an active roll, because that is a medium that parents would go to see, they do not do that with games, so when they drop little bobby off at the mall with his friends, and he walks into his local EB or Gamestop and buys a game like Condemned or GTA or any M rated game for that matter, and brings it home, the parent is not going to even know he has that game, because they dont take an active role in knowing what their kids are playing.. Why? Because most parents are from the Atari 2600/Coleco/Intellivision/NES days, when there were really only E games, and now all of a sudden they see their kid jacking someone in GTA and they freak out and go back to the store and bitch and complain, and then capitol hill gets wind of it, and then the Clinton/Lieberman tag team goes to work..

So you know what, if it helps protect kids while not affecting my play, then I am all for it.

 

[Excess Poo Flakes]

Fuck the govament

 

[DenogginizerOS]

Yeah I dont see a problem here. If you are over 17, then no issues...

If you try to go to an R rated movie, and you are under 17, u arent getting in... Same should go with videogames...

I agree with some people that it should fall on the parents, but unlike movies, where parents take an active roll, because that is a medium that parents would go to see, they do not do that with games, so when they drop little bobby off at the mall with his friends, and he walks into his local EB or Gamestop and buys a game like Condemned or GTA or any M rated game for that matter, and brings it home, the parent is not going to even know he has that game, because they dont take an active role in knowing what their kids are playing.. Why? Because most parents are from the Atari 2600/Coleco/Intellivision/NES days, when there were really only E games, and now all of a sudden they see their kid jacking someone in GTA and they freak out and go back to the store and bitch and complain, and then capitol hill gets wind of it, and then the Clinton/Lieberman tag team goes to work..

So you know what, if it helps protect kids while not affecting my play, then I am all for it.

As a parent, the M on the box is all I need to restrict it. Parents need to get involved and discuss these games with their kids and help the child understand what it is about the game that is for adults. This law is a pure political stunt. Now, the shithead parents who are the problem in the first place will now be even more pissed because they have to get out of the car that they have idling in the Wal-Mart Fire Lane so they can purchase the game. They will likely verbally beat on little Johnny before he gets home, ignore/beat him when he gets home, and then wonder why he hates later on. Look, games are not the problem; it is young minds being ignored.

 

[kaching]

Why is there a second thread about this when the one from a day or two ago was still going strong? SEARCH, people!

 

[DenogginizerOS]

Why is there a second thread about this when the one from a day or two ago was still going strong? SEARCH, people!

I would have searched if I knew there was something to search for. Considering the number of entries in this one, why would I think otherwise? But thanks for the info.

 

[monchi-kun]

i just seems like Videogames are being classified as a "controlled substance" like cigarettes and alcholol based on the wording of this legislation...and people aren't bothered by this?

 

[kaching]

That wasn't aimed at you, it was aimed at Nintendo X who started this thread and actually participated in the earlier one

 

[luxsol]

i just seems like Videogames are being classified as a "controlled substance" like cigarettes and alcholol based on the wording of this legislation...and people aren't bothered by this?

Because this law doesn't affect them, so they don't care without realize what can happen.

But it seems this law is unconstitutional anyway, so it really doesn't matter.

 

[kaching]

i just seems like Videogames are being classified as a "controlled substance" like cigarettes and alcholol based on the wording of this legislation...and people aren't bothered by this?

*raises hand* I'm definitely bothered by it. For the sake of administering a placebo on a portion of the US populace that will be utterly ineffective at tackling the root of any problems here, this legislation would add legitimacy to the idea that videogames are in some way inherently deleterious, without any credible body of scientific evidence to back it up. There's nothing in the way of hard scientific proof to show cause and effect negative impact of playing games like there is for alcohol or drugs like cocaine.

 

[AirBrian]

So who would pay for the audits?

 

[monchi-kun]

To the people saying that this legislation actually FREES the gaming industry to pursue even more violent or sexual content should consider WHO this legislation is being aimed at. Rockstar can add a sex mini-game to the next GTA game complete with replay control of the MONEY SHOT....but will Walmart carry the game?

The government may not be restricting content but they are going to choke the primary way of distributing games by scaring retailers with fines and sting operations. This gives retailers an even BIGGER say on what kind of games they carry which might lead to publishers/developers taming down their content even more.

 

[VictimOfGrief]

VoG to GAF people that are +17 years of age who want little kids to play Mortal Kombat 12 : Instant Death edition:


WHO THE F CARES?

 

[monchi-kun]

VoG to GAF people that are +17 years of age who want little kids to play Mortal Kombat 12 : Instant Death edition:


WHO THE F CARES?

it's BEYOND wanting kids to play M-Rated games.....that is a seriously retarded argument. legsilation has repercussions and as I mentioned before, this one subversively makes games look like a controlled substance.

 

[Ghost]

Why do so many of you rate the importance of keeping the games industry from being demonized above the importance of keeping violent content out of the hands of children?

As a parent, the M on the box is all I need to restrict it. Parents need to get involved and discuss these games with their kids and help the child understand what it is about the game that is for adults. This law is a pure political stunt. Now, the shithead parents who are the problem in the first place will now be even more pissed because they have to get out of the car that they have idling in the Wal-Mart Fire Lane so they can purchase the game. They will likely verbally beat on little Johnny before he gets home, ignore/beat him when he gets home, and then wonder why he hates later on. Look, games are not the problem; it is young minds being ignored.

The M on the box is all you need to stop you buying it for your kid, but apparently its not enough to stop the store selling it to your kid when you arent there, or to his friends.




Ignore the fact they are games...its violent content, i think you'd all mostly agree that being exposed to violence (especially outside of parental supervision) is bad for kids. The industry isnt policing itself properly, so the government should step in.

 

[DenogginizerOS]

Let's focus on the real problem: Some politicians and other misinformed people believe that video games are at the root of the evil that possessed some kid to shoot people in a police station or a school. Nobody complained when these children were decapitiating squirrels and shooting neighbor's animals with .22 rifles, but as soon as some humans are harmed, then Rockstar and GTA are the poster-child for evil. Just like idiots once accused the music industry of promoting devil worship, these same misinformed idiots are now trying to put a band-aid on the sucking chest wound that is a continued failure by many parents and guardians to be even slightly involved in their children's lives and to be capable of telling their child "No!".

 

[monchi-kun]

Ignore the fact they are games...its violent content, i think you'd all mostly agree that being exposed to violence (especially outside of parental supervision) is bad for kids. The industry isnt policing itself properly, so the government should step in.

Then bibles should not be sold to anyone under 17 because of all the violence portrayed in that book, yet it has never received any kind of parental warning.

I just don't think that legislation is the right answer especially when it's coming from people who are outspoken critics of videogame content. Throughout this whole ordeal, the Leibermans and the Clintons out there have criticized the violent content in games. If the law allowed them they would censor games outright because that's what they really want.

Getting this bill passed won't make Hillary or Joe become more accepting of violent or sexual content in videogames.

 

[DenogginizerOS]

Ignore the fact they are games...its violent content, i think you'd all mostly agree that being exposed to violence (especially outside of parental supervision) is bad for kids. The industry isnt policing itself properly, so the government should step in.

A good parent would should be capable of keeping tabs on what their child is or is not playing. Should a retailer sell an M-Rated game to a minor? No. Do we need to have a law? No. I agree with the controlled substance argument. If M-Rated games are like alcohol and tobacco, are teen rated games near-beer? MOH-Allied Assault and Super Smash Brothers are bot Teen rated games. Now, that is confusing for me as a parent.

 

[AirBrian]

Why do so many of you rate the importance of keeping the games industry from being demonized above the importance of keeping violent content out of the hands of children?



The M on the box is all you need to stop you buying it for your kid, but apparently its not enough to stop the store selling it to your kid when you arent there, or to his friends.




Ignore the fact they are games...its violent content, i think you'd all mostly agree that being exposed to violence (especially outside of parental supervision) is bad for kids. The industry isnt policing itself properly, so the government should step in.

Do these kids live alone? No, they don't. Parents can easily see what their children are playing, and if it's something they do not approve of, take away.

What's next...legislation against selling candy and sugared soft drinks to children?

 

[KiKaL]

So for you who are against this, do you hate the fact that people under the age of 17 can't buy/see in theaters R rated movies? I don't see how this is any differn't

 

[monchi-kun]

So for you who are against this, do you hate the fact that people under the age of 17 can't buy/see in theaters R rated movies? I don't see how this is any differn't

again, this goes BEYOND us wanting minors to access content that's inappropriate for them....just read my last post:

To the people saying that this legislation actually FREES the gaming industry to pursue even more violent or sexual content should consider WHO this legislation is being aimed at. Rockstar can add a sex mini-game to the next GTA game complete with replay control of the MONEY SHOT....but will Walmart carry the game?

The government may not be restricting content but they are going to choke the primary way of distributing games by scaring retailers with fines and sting operations. This gives retailers an even BIGGER say on what kind of games they carry which might lead to publishers/developers taming down their content even more.

Retailers don't want trouble, so instead of making sure that their employees are following the rules (and spend money training them) might as well NOT carry a particular game to avoid trouble altogether. The government can't censor content directly but there are other ways you can do this.

 

[Ghost]

A good parent would should be capable of keeping tabs on what their child is or is not playing. Should a retailer sell an M-Rated game to a minor? No. Do we need to have a law? No. I agree with the controlled substance argument. If M-Rated games are like alcohol and tobacco, are teen rated games near-beer? MOH-Allied Assault and Super Smash Brothers are bot Teen rated games. Now, that is confusing for me as a parent.

Do these kids live alone? No, they don't. Parents can easily see what their children are playing, and if it's something they do not approve of, take away.

So, you dont want kids playing the games, you agree they shouldnt be playing them....



Why not just STOP KIDS FROM BUYING THE GAMES?


Parents need to take more responsibility for raising their children, sure, that doesnt mean the government shouldnt do anything to help.

 

[kaching]

Why do so many of you rate the importance of keeping the games industry from being demonized above the importance of keeping violent content out of the hands of children?

I DON'T. I contend that this will do little or nothing to actually keep violent content out of the hands of children. It's a hollow gesture making a scapegoat of the videogame industry. Show me first that any existing legislation that regulates potentially harmful items or substances from getting into the hands of minors is effective FIRST before telling me to accept another one of these regulations.

Bottom line, I think this legislation has more potential to harm the videogame industry than it does to keep kids safe.

 

[Taker666]

again, this goes BEYOND us wanting minors to access content that's inappropriate for them....just read my last post:

To the people saying that this legislation actually FREES the gaming industry to pursue even more violent or sexual content should consider WHO this legislation is being aimed at. Rockstar can add a sex mini-game to the next GTA game complete with replay control of the MONEY SHOT....but will Walmart carry the game?

The government may not be restricting content but they are going to choke the primary way of distributing games by scaring retailers with fines and sting operations. This gives retailers an even BIGGER say on what kind of games they carry which might lead to publishers/developers taming down their content even more.

Retailers don't want trouble, so instead of making sure that their employees are following the rules (and spend money training them) might as well NOT carry a particular game to avoid trouble altogether. The government can't censor content directly but there are other ways you can do this.

So do DVD retailers in the US not stock R rated films?

 

[monchi-kun]

Parents need to take more responsibility for raising their children, sure, that doesnt mean the government shouldnt do anything to help.

in typical government fashion their "help" comes in the form of fines and sting ops rather than education or retailer support.

what do you guys think of this suggestion:

Government spends tax money helping update Point of Sale systems where M rated games require a divers license to be scanned before a purchase is authorized? EMPOWER the retailer to reprimand an employee FIRST before levying a FINE on the entire establishment.

 

[monchi-kun]

So do DVD retailers in the US not stock R rated films?

but i see no legislation being written to fine a retailer from selling an R-Rated DVD to a minor, or an independent body making sure that movie ratings are up to standards of the content being shown by the movie. (if there is please let me know).

If they're going to burden the videogame industry then why not other forms of entertainment?

On the retailer side...do you guys know how much margin there is on games? it's sure a LOT less than movies and music. You always measure your risk vs. reward it seems like too much trouble for something that isn't giving you a high profit margin.

If this passes we're not going to see the effects right away but I think videogame content will be affected in the long run unless this industry FREES itself from the dependency on retail.

 

[APF]

The video game industry already does a great job at policing itself; the ESRB has been doing a great job so far. There has only been one big mistake so far, and that was hidden away and unplayable (through normal means) like so many other unfinished parts that many other game discs contain.

It's the retailers who aren't doing their job, nor the parents. Retailers rarely ask for IDs when a kid buys a game, but it's the same way with R rated movies.
It's not against the law for a minor to watch or be sold an R rated movie. No M rated game contains more mature content than any R rated movie, nor does an M rated game affect a minor's (or ANYONE'S) mind anymore than an R-rated movie does. So why should M-rated games be subject to a federal law?

There is no damn good reason besides appeasing ignorant parents and, in their minds, proving that games are worse than movies (or any other media) that can negativelly (or positively affecting violent tendencies) affect a person's mind.
This is why a federal law like this is dangerous.
This law would put M-rated games in the same category as drugs, guns and pornography. And it seems a lot of people who are in favor of this bill seem to find these dangerous for children. Do you people really think games are just as dangerous?

I agree with pretty much everything I've seen you post in this thread, so I'll go on a little tangent. The problem here is the retailers. First, places like EB/Gamestop/etc which focus almost exclusively on video games have no excuse for not knowing their inventory and "accidentally" allowing a child to grab a game that they're not cleared for via the ESRB ratings. There's really no excuse for that; if they can be programmed to answer the phone with some annoying 30-second line about their shop being the place to sell back your used games, they can be programmed to ask teenagers for ID to buy an M-rated title. But retailers offering a much broader range of content have a different set of obstacles to hurdle, namely the public perception of video games as a "kids" medium in the first place, and therefore subconsciously compartmentalizing when a kid steps up to buy a game. It's different for movies because even if you're not familiar with a certain title you don't automatically assume everything is appropriate for kids (which an unsavvy cashier may assume for games, esp for something like Conker), and because there are better 'cues' to pick up on when addressing movies (themes, packaging, etc) that may not be so for games (since they're almost all action-oriented and marketed towards men 18-35, even if they're not expressly-rated M). The real fight here IMO is the same fight that the game industry is fighting in terms of being recognized as a "legitimate" content medium along the lines of movies--the fight to be acknowledged and respected as something other than a "kids" playtime.

 

[AirBrian]

So, you dont want kids playing the games, you agree they shouldnt be playing them....



Why not just STOP KIDS FROM BUYING THE GAMES?


Parents need to take more responsibility for raising their children, sure, that doesnt mean the government shouldnt do anything to help.

Kids mature at different rates. If mature enough, I would probably let my 15-year old play the M-rated Resident Evil 4. I might think twice however, about letting him screw hookers and kill cops and other pedestrians in a Grand Theft Auto game. But that should be MY decision as a parent, not the government's. I, as a taxpayer, should not be obligated to pay part of my income to the government so they can parent children.

 

[Taker666]

but i see no legislation being written to fine a retailer from selling an R-Rated DVD to a minor, or an independent body making sure that movie ratings are up to standards of the content being shown by the movie. (if there is please let me know).

I was just asking out of interest as I live in the UK.

We've had laws that make it illegal to sell the games/dvd's to minors for years (although it still happens). ..and we still have all the gory games you have in the US. Parents just buy them for kids now to shut them up.

Personally I think the same laws should apply to DVD's in the US as they are trying to force on games.

 

[VictimOfGrief]

it's BEYOND wanting kids to play M-Rated games.....that is a seriously retarded argument. legsilation has repercussions and as I mentioned before, this one subversively makes games look like a controlled substance.

Games are not the controlled substance... DUMBFUCK PARENTS ARE.

 

[Ghost]

Kids mature at different rates. If mature enough, I would probably let my 15-year old play the M-rated Resident Evil 4. I might think twice however, about letting him screw hookers and kill cops and other pedestrians in a Grand Theft Auto game. But that should be MY decision as a parent, not the government's. I, as a taxpayer, should not be obligated to pay part of my income to the government so they can parent children.

It is your decision, you buy the game for your kid. If the kid can buy the games himself, then the decision is out of your hands.

 

[kaching]

Games are not the controlled substance... DUMBFUCK PARENTS ARE.

We keep creating regulations to try to control the dumbfucks of the world...they never seem to do much good.