Scratch

i think you should allow them to stay on scratch but some of them yes may be violent but if the name sounds too violent for school dont let them view it or let them view it at their own thoughts

andy321 wrote:

PokemonMaster64 wrote:

I think some people use video game violence as an outlet for anger. I know if I didn't have break time to slash up some monsters with a sword in a  good game of zelda to vent out frustration, I would go crazy and probably violent! I think playing something like Halo doesn't make you as violent as knowing all your friends play it and that they mock you behind your back because you don't.

yeah, if people don't take their anger out on people in video games, they might take it out on people in real life.

yes. they make very good punching bags.

jman13 wrote:

I think you should gather a bunch of scratchers toghether and send them to search for violent projects and then flag as many as they can.(or you can post reminders that tell pepol not to make violent projects.) 

First of all, violent projects ARE allowed.

And the whole scratch group thing has happened, but the flagged projects with very little violence and went all power mad.

jman13 wrote:

I think you should gather a bunch of scratchers toghether and send them to search for violent projects and then flag as many as they can.(or you can post reminders that tell pepol not to make violent projects.) 

Okay that's over the top. Boys like games where you kill stuff. Nuf' said.

militarydudes wrote:

jman13 wrote:

I think you should gather a bunch of scratchers toghether and send them to search for violent projects and then flag as many as they can.(or you can post reminders that tell pepol not to make violent projects.) 

Okay that's over the top. Boys like games where you kill stuff. Nuf' said.

Not all of them. 

Most of them on Scratch like platformers and such - no violence, expect maybe jumping onto a wandering baddie.

i agree i have the game say you kill som1 they disappear

StarCobra wrote:

i think scratch should have scratch for schools with no innapropriate content and the regular scratch ..... i dunno

But then, what's inappropriate?

StarCobra wrote:

i agree i have the game say you kill som1 they disappear

That's just your way of doing things.

Do people realize that insane blood effects take time and the creator actually worked hard to create them?

calebxy wrote:

Rodentboy wrote:

militarydudes wrote:

Okay that's over the top. Boys like games where you kill stuff. Nuf' said.

I believe that all humanity has that instinct to conquer and inflict pain lurking inside of him, and I think the best way to keep it at bay is by violent games.

So, you're saying that people should play violent games to, let out their anger instead of doing it in real life? Something like that. Well, it's proven that violent programs and video games make people more violent.

It won't make them violent to the extent of doing something serious unless they have mental problems.

calebxy wrote:

But it will make them more violent.

Is this a problem?

calebxy wrote:

Yes. I do not want more violent people in the world.

Too late- over 5 more were born just three hours ago. But playing violent(-ish) video games always seem to relieve stress and lust for violence for me. I do see your point, but the people who've tested that could always have been biased or maybe mixed up some tiny things, just like everyone else does and/or is.

LATER EDIT: Wow, my post itself is a little over the top/ violent? I apologize. Back then, I had no idea how young an age Scratch was targeting it's users. I guess my only defense would be that I have been stuck in this debate for at least 30 years or longer now. I have also taught at various levels for about 25 years. Obviously, I feel very strongly about both gaming and teaching. Gamers have ALWAYS been commonly classified as wasting their time while becoming dumber and more violent. Both the gamer and the teacher in me knows this is simply not true.
But I'm not raising the following points because I want kids to play violent, bloody video games. I'm just saying that the term "violence" can be applied in more ways than we could count so using it as a blanket reason to deny kids the opportunity to use Scratch as the amazing learning tool that it is, is just plain ridiculous. Teachers should fight to give their students the best available tools for education instead of looking for excuses to mandate morality while simultaneously denying them knowledge. But I'm still a little embarrassed by my post, sorry 

Original Message:
The implication is that it is the violence in video games that affects people when I suspect that in reality it is an autonomous type response to ANYTHING that vigorously stimulates the brain into a heightened sense of activity.

It is the ironic nature of this discussion that really kills me 
"No depiction of violence toward animals!!" - Oh really? One question for you supporters of this one, what animals were slaughtered for your last meal? I guess real violence and death doesn't upset you as much as virtual violence? In fact, it can be quite tasty!!

"No violence towards humans" Humans are the most violent species on the planet. The Bible itself basically includes a how-to manual for warfare. Yet we are discussing legislating the morality of mostly poorly-drawn pixels? How laughable. Life feeds on life, think about it? There is no workaround to suit someone's idealistic, self-righteous "let them eat cake" mentality. How much blood is too much blood in a game? There's a scary bug in the house, kill it! Don't you hate it when a kitten runs out in front of your car, why does that have to happen? I hurt someone a little when I was young but now I'm older and know better, does that make me a bad person? Mad dad was a war hero! I got suspended for fighting today but I was being bullied by these 3 mean guys....

Anyway, my point is that the world is NOT black and white. The bad guys are only bad guys when they lose the fight and history books are written. You only find violence distasteful when it is convenient. Everything is relative to the perspective of the observer. You say hate violence - but when you call the cops cause you woke up with someone prowling around inside your home at 3:00 am, now the welfare of your family depends on violence. A violence that you welcome graciously!!

What this really comes down to in real world terms is liability. In a grander sense, the school should realize that it's greatest liability lies in the education of its students through the best resources available by dedicated professionals. Instead, "liability" means being careful not to get sued and/or lose their jobs. Hence rico's mentality of "change the world or we're ignoring it." I don't have as much of a problem with that because that is just how low our public school system has sunk in the US so to work there, you have to be a glutton for punishment. But I am infuriated that any misguided idiot with enough college hours can take it upon themselves to enforce morality by denying opportunity in a classroom. If you want to stop the violence rico then take away their pencils and paper, that would be far more effective!! (...what is mightier than the sword?...) And all you people talking about 4 year olds playing violent games, it is not the games fault... but what exactly did YOU do about that situation? What we are really discussing is communication of information. The person at fault is not the programmer but the parent/idiot who let the game babysit for them. In this case that person would be rico.

Scratch, do like all sharing sites and add a mature content system. Or make the current system more fair! Instead of just violence, racism, blood, *, etc, I say we add some new ban-worthy offenses. How about claiming that your game rocks when it really sucks? Or casually asking for someone to write some 3d code for the 1st person shooter that your new game group is 'producing?' Here is a good one, I say we ban everyone who asks a question in the forum, gets like 8 in-depth replies with tons of forum blocks, and then waits 3 days before re-posting about how they have moved on to a new project. >=P

Last edited by Locomule (2010-08-17 23:45:36)

Locomule wrote:

The implication is that it is the violence in video games that affects people when I suspect that in reality it is an autonomous type response to ANYTHING that vigorously stimulates the brain into a heightened sense of activity.

[Very long entry/post, shortened as not to make the page too long. See actual post above.]

Scratch, do like all sharing sites and add a mature content system. Or make the current system more fair! Instead of just violence, racism, blood, etc, I say we add some new ban-worthy offenses. How about claiming that your game rocks when it really sucks? Or casually asking for someone to write some 3d code for the 1st person shooter that your new game group is 'producing?' Here is a good one, I say we ban everyone who asks a question in the forum, gets like 8 in-depth replies with tons of forum blocks, and then waits 3 days before re-posting about how they have moved on to a new project. >=P

Well said, Locomule.


My sister makes me mad. Very, VERY, mad. So mad you can't imagine. But then, I go play some non-violent fighting game, like AdventureQuest.  Then I don't want to kill her. (Okay, I never want to KILL her, but that's how I feel about her annoying me)

And also, I think there is a difference between a fighting game/animation and a violent one. A fighting one has fighting, such as hitting and punching, etc., maybe magic, but violent ones may have blood and gore, extremely gory fighting, and sometimes inappropriate content.  Heck, the "LEGO Star Wars" games are fighting games! But they're okay for little kids!