Report article RSS Feed Why we removed the school shooter mod

We have removed the School Shooter mod from ModDB, read on for our explanation.

Posted by INtense! on Mar 19th, 2011

Allow me to begin this post by saying we believe in the freedom of speech, the right to share information and be creative. We have enjoyed watching mod developers push the boundaries for years and create amazing content, and shall always do this.

However, recently a mod on the site called School Shooter: North American Tour 2012 has been getting quite a bit of mainstream press due to the controversial nature of the content. It seems that people sit on two sides of the fence on this one. There are those that believe the makers of this mod should have the right to make whatever they want, while there are others that believe it is disgusting and crosses the line.

We sit on both sides, on one hand we find the content to be deliberately offensive and in poor taste, but on the other we also feel people should have the right to be creative and share what they want on a community / developer run site, and we shouldn't have the right to dictate what is/isn't allowed.

The challenge faced is we are currently receiving quite a bit of threatening mail as people believe we are the creators, supporters and makers of this content. I want to stress that this absolutely isn't the case. We have never encouraged or made any content, we disagree with the mod but at the same time believe in freedom of speech and the unique ability modders and indie developers should have to create games (good-or-bad) about topics, issues and events considered risky or taboo.

There is also quite a bit of confusion from non-gaming press, who state that games like this are the reason why all bad things occur, spreading misinformation and fear. As a result of this confusion and hate, at the moment we feel the best course of action is to remove the mod. We don't want the hard work of thousands of other mod developers to be threatened by people misunderstanding this one mod/game, and assuming all others are like it.

Edit: We did contact the developers with no reply back in August 2010, chances are this would have ended differently if they had replied.

Post comment Comments  (100 - 150 of 438)
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 5:18am says:

INtense! you misunderstand, it wasn't ModDB who was contacted by Jack Thompson, it was Gabe Newell himself:
Escapistmagazine.com

His claims are that all shooter games are a training simulator for actual violent acts, one of his examples claims that Half Life was responsible for a school shooting in Germany.

There are a lot of people watching this go down and thus your actions have a huge impact on the way people perceive this issue. You claim that you're protecting the social outlook of ModDB users which is quite honestly a pathetic and meager excuse at best for contradicting your philosophy of free speech. The way the opposition perceives School Shooter mod is that it influences crime, and by caving to their demands you are acknowledging that assertion directly or not, and whatever you say in this article isn't going to change that.

+10 votes     reply to comment
INtense! Author
INtense! Mar 19 2011, 5:30am replied:

That is unfortunate, as we do not share jack's views and we are not trying to make a statement. It is the non-gaming press that like Jack want sensationalist headlines and instead of asking why the creator wants to make a controversial mod, they post headlines like "gamers shoot up schools" which is unfair and spreading misinformation. Our actions are attempting to minimize this

+8 votes   reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 5:34am replied:

Honestly INtense you should edit this article in a manner that doesn't insult our intelligence. It's pretty much 'we support freedom of speech in most cases but right now we're trying to cover our ***** from media interpretation even if it means harming the image of gaming as a medium in the process.', because that's exactly what it is.

-3 votes     reply to comment
Slevo
Slevo Mar 19 2011, 8:28am buried:

(buried)

seriously intense STFU you just want to be acknowledged as the people that took action. In the end that will have a bigger publicity attraction then just some crappy ******* of a data base that game developers go to and post their games we don't come here to be judged by you, Your out of line

-17 votes     reply to comment
Swaggletooth
Swaggletooth Mar 19 2011, 8:40am replied:

"we don't come here to be judged by you"

It's his website so he can do what he wants. Quite honestly I think it's a shame standards aren't in place for Moddb, the last few years have seen some really sub par mods thrown up here (many of which rarely go farther than MS Paint edited skins).

It would be good to see the bar raised, or at least have some sort of spotlight system to highlight the truly praiseworthy mods.

+5 votes     reply to comment
Slevo
Slevo Mar 19 2011, 9:22am buried:

(buried)

so different is not good? really we are artists and what is normally different and has determination to be different is encouraged. If you don't understand this then your in the wrong place, you will never be a decent game developer

-12 votes     reply to comment
Cervi_Messias
Cervi_Messias Mar 19 2011, 3:35pm replied:

its his ******* website so show some damn respect you *******. Thats freedom of speech, he has a right to decide what is on HIS website now if you dont like it start your own database. All of you are out of line cuz he owns the site he makes the rules.

+4 votes     reply to comment
Panzert
Panzert Mar 19 2011, 11:35am replied:

I disagree'd with you initially intense, but now i think i see your point.

+3 votes     reply to comment
Tatsur0
Tatsur0 Mar 19 2011, 5:32am replied:

Again read my comments above as I think they make clear as to the reasons behind the removal imho and validate it completely.

+5 votes     reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 5:49am replied:

snip

-1 votes     reply to comment
cW#Ravenblood
cW#Ravenblood Mar 19 2011, 8:01am replied:

I'm German and I know that there was no school shooting where Half Life wad involved. It was only found by guy who did this school shooting.
I think DesuraNet made a good desicion to deleate or close this mod. First, exactly those mods/games were used to forbid fps or in general violent games because they make people aggressive, secondly I think that we need mods with some intellectual part, not ones were you just shoot on humans which run away, humans were in that case not showed as human beeings, you have more the feeling that they are things, not humans. In my opinion thats inhuman. I would have no Problem if the shooting gets discussed inside the mod, why its bad etc, but thats useless shooting at students. A usefull mod could have a rampage first and than have a look back shy this and in generall why all rampages happen.

+6 votes     reply to comment
DeadSomething
DeadSomething Mar 19 2011, 9:00am replied:

first of all: first person shooters dont make aggressive. its the people who already are aggressive and need a way to let out their aggressions.
if we wouldnt have any socker, football or any such games, people would have been much more aggressive, because they need it to let out some aggression.
without those FPS games, there would be even more **** going on.
also, military specialists confirmed, that you cant in any way learn to use a weapon by playing Counterstrike.

0 votes     reply to comment
cW#Ravenblood
cW#Ravenblood Mar 19 2011, 9:34am replied:

I said that the people take exactly those shooters to say that they make aggressive, I dont say that they do.

+8 votes     reply to comment
DeadSomething
DeadSomething Mar 19 2011, 5:56pm replied:

ok, send me that text.
maybe i'm being sarcastic, but after all i have read forum postings and his last uploaded video (in which he explains why) from one of those who ran amok and it has nothing to do with the games.
when a person runs amok, in most cases they have been treated like **** or even been threatened or beaten up by their classmates before.
i have had some pretty bad experiences in school and teachers wont help in any situation, so thats my explanation to why they also shoot at teachers.
being mobbed for years can ruin your whole life and many would rather run amok to take revenge and kill themselves after that, instead of only committing suicide. if you want, i can send you links to those files i've seen. its first hand documentation - unlike what you can get from the official media, which is controlled by our politicians.

+1 vote     reply to comment
DeadSomething
DeadSomething Mar 19 2011, 8:55am replied:

here in germany we had many political discussions after some shool shootings. now they really wanted to make all FPS games illegal.
just because 2 of 3 people who ran amok had "CounterStrike" installed on their PCs.
Serious, lets forbid bread, 99% of all people in the world who ran amok have eaten bread that day!

and for those people who protested against the mod: you really shouldnt have given them any square-centimeter of ground. now that they have "won" one little battle, they think they can win the war.

0 votes     reply to comment
cW#Ravenblood
cW#Ravenblood Mar 19 2011, 9:35am replied:

Your argumentation is totaly sh*t, for school I've written a text, if you're german I send it to you and you than you know how to argue.

+6 votes     reply to comment
w0dk4
w0dk4 Mar 19 2011, 10:49am replied:

You know, after seeing **** like this mod posted here, I actually UNDERSTAND german politicians demanding a ban on violent video games.

This just portrays how much of a damage this troll mod is on both an ethical level and the video game reputation as a whole.

+4 votes     reply to comment
cinco
cinco Mar 19 2011, 5:30am says:

perhaps you didn't actually see the contents of the mod before it was deleted, so i'll inform you now. this was just a sad excuse by a bunch of imbeciles to try and push the boundaries of what is acceptable here.

if you've actually seen the mod and have a normally functioning brain,there should be no doubt in your mind that the mod would never have been finished. most of the work in progress are simply screenshots of various poses in garry's mod.

if you're still having trouble digesting what i'm feeding you: THIS MOD WAS A TROLL ATTEMPT. PERIOD. it wasn't a serious artistic effort nor was it done for amusement. it was done to get people riled up enough to give them the attention they wanted and it worked.

+17 votes     reply to comment
ProspectGames
ProspectGames Mar 19 2011, 7:59am replied:

Well we can't judge for ourselves now because the mod has been removed! And so what if it was designed to rile people up? Are games not allowed to do certain things? Should videogames remain the baby medium that needs telling what to do? How about we let these things exist and individuals can decide whether or not they will play it, enjoy, comment about it etc. That is generally how it works with content from other mediums.

+2 votes     reply to comment
w0dk4
w0dk4 Mar 19 2011, 10:53am replied:

You can judge yourself unless MODDB is the realm of your existence. Since I dont think you have such a restricted mind, try to search their website and stop spreading "freedom of speech" nonsense which does not apply to private websites.

+5 votes     reply to comment
ProspectGames
ProspectGames Mar 23 2011, 5:45am replied:

"You can judge yourself unless MODDB is the realm of your existence. Since I dont think you have such a restricted mind, try to search their website and stop spreading "freedom of speech" nonsense which does not apply to private websites. "

I should have included the points I made elsewhere in this thread in this post too. I think the owners of this website have every right to what is uploaded here, they can do whatever they want with their property. And I'm sure they remove stuff all the time (dead projects etc) but this is a stand out case where external controversy resulted in the removal of a mod that up until that point was "okay" and allowed to exist here.

I personally (I don't expect owners to conform to my view) think the controversy being stirred up should have been ignored and we should have been allowed to judge for ourselves whether or not it is controversal (again I personally don't and have no problem with it existing, as it will exist elsewhere anyway).

But the moddb team has given many reasons why they took it down, they are a small team in charge of a big site with 9 (I think) years invested in it. I don't agree with their desicion but I respect it and their right to control this site.

+2 votes     reply to comment
CovertChaos
CovertChaos Mar 19 2011, 11:49am replied:

Aparently, Mr. Bennison, you did not understand what cinco was saying. This mod should never have been taken seriously, because it was nothing more than a cry for attention from some immature idiots.

+3 votes     reply to comment
ProspectGames
ProspectGames Mar 23 2011, 5:47am replied:

If that is the case I expect it would have been removed before the external hysteria, not after. And again its hard to judge because it's not here. Yes I can find it (and info) elsewhere (which I have) but I have little time and lots to do!

+2 votes     reply to comment
Xendrid
Xendrid Mar 19 2011, 5:39am says:

The mod truly was tasteless with the soul purpose of watching the internet squirm.

+11 votes     reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 5:51am says:

You know what this is getting ridiculous what I'm hearing here in the comments section and it's nothing short of hypocritical.

The actual mod? Yes it WAS intended for reactionaries to squirm, it WAS tasteless and it was probably a very poorly done mod with little going for it. It was TRANSPARENT that the mod was made to incite reaction and that's exactly what it did, and I was happy for that. This mod brought up an issue in a way that words alone would not allow and bring attention to on such a scale.

So what's bad about it? That you kill people? Guess what, we do that in nearly every game we play. Play Hitman! You're not acting out of your personal moral views as you would in real life, you're enacting a fictional circumstance for entertainment in a way that's protected by our constitution.

It's not about the game, it's not about the quality, it's about freedom of ******* speech and that's the point of this game and why it was CRITICAL how ModDB would choose to react about how they would react to journalistic crybabies. I don't care if the ModDB staff are afraid of how ********* will perceive them from letting people express their right to freedom of speech. If you're afraid of people judging you for acting as a ******* mod database and adhering to freedom of speech then let someone else do it because I'm sure there are plenty willing to take your adspace.

I don't give a **** if it wasn't your 'intention' to support the retarded claims that video games train murderers or not because that's what you did in the eyes of the public, and the real supposed reason you guys claim sucks. Prepare the downvotes since I'm not sucking up to staffers but know that by supporting this action, you are supporting censoring media and mods good or bad on shallow pretext as violence.

+3 votes     reply to comment
INtense! Author
INtense! Mar 19 2011, 6:16am replied:

please state your views, we don't expect people to side with staffers and will never be angry at people who disagree with us. We expect that, I feel our actions are right, but once we talk to the devs and others if we've made a mistake i'll be the first to admit it.

+13 votes   reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 6:18am replied:

I have stated my views, what I'm asking for is you to help me understand the reasoning behind your actions or at least respond to them. I'm happy that you're not angry that people state their opinions but I'd like to hear an answer for my points as well as others.

+4 votes     reply to comment
Tatsur0
Tatsur0 Mar 19 2011, 7:33am replied:

It's rather simple, there is freedom of speech and then there is crossing a line. If the mod were a virtual rape simulator or a filled with child pornography it would be taken down with little to no argument from the community. I understand more than most that these two topics don't come close to what this "mod" is but as I mentioned before we have lines that we know should not be crossed.

It's not a difficult conclusion to come to, though I admit that Intense attempting to assure us that free speech would not be harmed came across poorly but was meant well and should be taken for what it is, a concerned site owner trying to reassure his community that he has done what he could but in the end HAD to pull this "mod"

+4 votes     reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 7:43am replied:

You are right, the line of freedom is drawn when it infringes on the freedom of others. As gross and distasteful you may find something, as long as you don't disturb the contradiction of freedom that disrupts the freedom of others then, then you're in the green. The child pornography example you bring up is irrelevant because it's not the content being expressed that makes it illegal, rather the effect on the children. If children are depicted in an animation or rendered while real children aren't exposed, as gross and wrong as we find it, it's still legal.

This line you speak of has yet to be crossed. If you wish to remove this mod then you do not support freedom of speech, plain and simple.

-2 votes     reply to comment
Tatsur0
Tatsur0 Mar 19 2011, 8:15am replied:

Actually it is in fact illegal for fictional children to be depicted in a sexual nature that is deemed obscene. The line was drawn before today and while I appreciate free speech, I believe we need to police ourselves and our community and keep crap like this from turning into something bigger than it is which is what you're attempting to do.

Lastly, ModDB/IndieDB is in no way abusing anyones freedom of speech but instead removing a profile which is their legal right and allowing you to scream, cry, and claim whatever you like repeatedly. Enjoy your freedom of speech when claiming it's being stripped.

Well done ModDB, it's about time it got pulled.

+4 votes     reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 8:15pm replied:

"Actually it is in fact illegal for fictional children to be depicted in a sexual nature that is deemed obscene."
Where? Australia? You supposedly live in ******* Japan so you should do yourself a favor and go to a place where they sell doujins and ask for loli. That's a sexual depiction of fictional underage children and I'm sure if that was illegal then the Japanese police would send in a team and end these public congregations themselves.

-1 votes     reply to comment
CovertChaos
CovertChaos Mar 19 2011, 11:58am replied:

holdenmcclure, seriously, do you get payed to complain?

+6 votes     reply to comment
vader333
vader333 Mar 19 2011, 5:54am buried:

(buried)

Big Blocks of text not get job done.zzz

-10 votes     reply to comment
DuckSauce
DuckSauce Mar 19 2011, 5:54am says:

Whatever the consequences, I think this was a right step, it's not about it being about killing, media and others will always be using violence in games as an excuse for the flawed moral upbringing and guidance of people's children when they go nuts.

This is about ill intent, the creators of that "mod" were like cinco said above, intent on seeing how far they could push the boundaries and get as much as attention as possible, such behaviour is a disgrace to both modding and gaming developers who may make games with murder or without murder, but are doing so without the intent to drag the reputation of games(and in this case mods) further into the mud.

Free speech is nice and all, but it's limited regardless, discrimination isn't allowed just because there's free speech.

This mod was an attempt to see how far they could push it, they pushed too far and are now facing the consequences and it's not exactly stopping them from continuing their work.

ModDB is like a website hosting service, except it hosts mods and games and other game related content in a different format. Aren't normally those normally asked to shut down sites hosting things like child porn?

I can't imagine they're not, there's a limit to what is acceptable to put up for hosting, the line was intentionally crossed here and ModDB took action after being pressured to do so.

There will likely be consequences, but there would be too if they did not take action, whatever they'd choose to do, they'd have people pointing their fingers at them, but I think they did the right thing in giving the developers a good hint that what they're doing is not acceptable.

+12 votes     reply to comment
cinco
cinco Mar 19 2011, 6:09am says:

moddb did the right thing. they have no obligation towards letting people use this site to make sophomoric political statements or as a playground for idiots. if you want that go to 4chan.

maybe moddb overestimated people's intelligence. this is a site for mods and games. just because you package your "joke" as a mod doesn't mean people will just play along with it and watch as the silly little stunt gets this site pulled into the crosshairs of psychos like jack thompson.

to put it into perspective: deal with the onslaught of hatemail and pressure from the media...or abort this retard of a mod idea. the choice should be easy.

+5 votes     reply to comment
medve
medve Mar 19 2011, 6:22am says:

maybe it should have been a postal like mod, with humour and fun and violence...dont ****** tell me that u guys didnt ever had the feeling to kick one of the teachers face.
maybe a mod taking place in a murderers mind like karsakovia with a twist i donno. these kids dont have too much creativity thats for sure.

-3 votes     reply to comment
Tharapita
Tharapita Mar 19 2011, 6:32am says:

I don't know ... I for one agree that things like this shouldn't be made. As such I for one support moddb for taking it off. Flame away.

+8 votes     reply to comment
feillyne Staff
feillyne Mar 19 2011, 6:33am says:

One removal of the content because of moral or aesthetic issues may lead to another one.

Why not make an age confirmation or content agreement page? I.e. if somebody enters the address of the controversial mod/game, he first is asked to confirm/agree to terms that the mod/game is solely the work of the appropriate development team and regarding the content he has to contact these teams directly instead of the admins and owners of ModDB/IndieDB.

The viewer and viewer's parents that allow him to see the page would then take the sole responsibility for browsing the controversial content.

So two or one confirmation pages - either/both age & controversial content agreements.

+5 votes   reply to comment
ProspectGames
ProspectGames Mar 19 2011, 8:22am replied:

Great idea, it's up to adults to decide what they view, they don't need protecting. Children do, and this is a good system to help that.

+1 vote     reply to comment
{SOTW}LoneWolf
{SOTW}LoneWolf Mar 19 2011, 6:45am buried:

(buried)

Wow, **** you guys for caving in.

-6 votes     reply to comment
DoctorCheese
DoctorCheese Mar 19 2011, 6:45am says:

Does it really need a good reason to why youre removing it?...

I mean, think about it, the setting of the mod is just sick. Seriously.

+8 votes     reply to comment
KILLER89(FIN)
KILLER89(FIN) Mar 19 2011, 7:18am buried:

(buried)

Not that you people would be.. "healthy" anyway.

-8 votes     reply to comment
DuckSauce
DuckSauce Mar 19 2011, 7:21am replied:

Oh really? Clarify that and these "you people".

+9 votes     reply to comment
Metalspy
Metalspy Mar 19 2011, 8:27am replied:

Lol wtf..

+5 votes     reply to comment
thekolokolone
thekolokolone Mar 19 2011, 8:32am replied:

There are tons of sick shooters. And there are a lot of violent games. Why should they ban it(the school shooter mod)? Cuz of a few victims? Millions of innocent people died in wars created by america, but those few lame died of weapons given by america. People still playing world war games happily, celebrating the great american warlords, who gave the same weapon to that children who killed other children. Whats the difference? Nothing. You have no one to blame, but yourself for letting yourself enslaved.

-3 votes     reply to comment
CountVlad
CountVlad Mar 19 2011, 6:52am says:

I'm not making a judgement on the mod as I've not seen it, but to all the guys talking about freedom of speech, where would you draw the line? When would a mod be going 'too far'? At what point should a mod be removed?

+5 votes     reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 6:55am replied:

Freedom of speech has only gone too far when it directly affects the freedom of others.

-2 votes     reply to comment
DuckSauce
DuckSauce Mar 19 2011, 7:19am replied:

That is your opinion, it is not a fact.
Discriminating a person for skin color, for example: You are speaking freely, but it's discrimination and will not be tolerated.
Does discrimating someone directly affect that persons freedom?

What about insulting a police officer, or anyone for that matter. Real freedom of speech would be saying what you think of that person("I don't like you!") insulting someone is another matter though as police officers can give you a fine for insulting an officer on duty and perhaps worse.

But does that affect their freedom directly?

The answer for both of these is no, you are trying to present your opinion as a fact, I recommend you package it as what it really is.

But perhaps I'm wrong and what you say is true, which would mean freedom of speech is drilled into the ground when it shouldn't, but to prove that, present the actual fact from a credible source.

What I'm saying may not be facts either, but it's how I've perceived them to be in my country, whether these things are right or not.

I'm however not going to hunt down the appropriate facts, the whole point of this is, if you are just giving your opinion, state it as such, what you just said came accross as quoting a fact, but without citing a credible source.

+4 votes     reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 7:22am buried:

(buried)

No I am not stating an 'opinion' I am stating the stipulations of the ******* constitution.

Do we like listening to racists? No. Do we agree with Racists? No. Do we agree with people who speak sexist, racist, discriminatory words? No. Does that mean I don't respect their right to say it even if I disagree? Also no.

"actual fact from a credible source."

Are you really gonna make me cite the 1st amendment? We can think something is wrong or offensive all we want but we can't just wish it away no matter how much you want it to.

-5 votes     reply to comment
DuckSauce
DuckSauce Mar 19 2011, 7:26am replied:

Constitution, show me a place where I can read this constitution then, again you come with no proof.

Is your country's constitution even the same as mine? And what constitution would apply to an international website that has users from all over the world?

+4 votes     reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 7:35am replied:

Alright, you have a point that US constitution does not govern the entire world, however it is my belief that the freedom of speech should be heeded regardless, and INtense states himself that he supports this belief.

Freedom of Speech as written in the constitution is as I say, a means to allow people to speak on equal opportunity lest it infringe on the rights of others. There are more specific stipulations regarding law enforcement and possibly more, but such exceptions do not apply in this case. You can easily find the actual document yourself with a simple Google search and I'd implore you to save me the effort if you're actually interested. It is not my responsibility to guide you or even help you understand the philosophy INtense claims to support.

If it is your belief that freedom of speech doesn't apply if you're personally morally opposed to something then you should know that's far from freedom of speech and defeats the purpose of the term completely, and as a user I am voicing my disappointment with the fact that the ModDB admins clearly come in with certain intentions but fail to understand how to achieve them.

-2 votes     reply to comment
DuckSauce
DuckSauce Mar 19 2011, 7:58am replied:

I have done as you say and googled the US Constitution, what I find there is but one reference to freedom of speech, namely in this section:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of
grievances. "

No other mentions of freedom relating to this subject, or any mentions regarding crossing the line of freedom of speech. So either all 4 US constitutions I've been looking through are fakes, or it's not in the US consitution, but perhaps somewhere else. For it does seem strange there is nothing about racism, affecting freedom of other others or other cases of what is crossing the line.

So, if what you say is a fact, it's not anywhere in the US consitution that I can see it, so where is this fact written then?

+3 votes     reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 8:01am replied:

There is no Freedom of Speech if we pick and choose which can speak freely DuckSauce, that is the end of the line and there is no amount of pedantic nitpicking you can strawman that can change that for any man who is capable of thought. It's a contradictory statement and I have wasted too much time arguing this frivolous line of debate that is ultimately a tangent that only pertained to a common understanding of morals that INtense claims to side with.

+1 vote     reply to comment
DuckSauce
DuckSauce Mar 19 2011, 8:12am replied:

"There is no Freedom of Speech if we pick and choose which can speak freely"

Which seems to be the case here, I can find nothing in the US constitution at least that proves the right of ModDB to say they're still upkeeping freedom of speech.

Therefore you are in the right there. Touché to you then.
Your fact still remains unproven, but it's no longer relevant, freedom of speech is broken here, because people found it to cross the lines of what's permitted, but this line only seems to exist in what the people made up, not how it is in fact.

So while ModDB does have the right to remove content as they choose legally, this then does not indeed uphold freedom of speech.

So really, +1 to you for winning this argument.

Regardless, my opinion(freedom of speech and opinion eh?) is still that ModDB did the right thing, regardless of keeping in mind those people's freedom of speech or not.

+1 vote     reply to comment
holdenmcclure
holdenmcclure Mar 19 2011, 8:26am replied:

At the end of the day, I have ideals that I wish to uphold, and I don't enforce those ideals on others, but at least try to communicate them in hopes others will agree. No camp supporting or not supporting free speech in this situation can be deemed as right morally, but INtense claims to be in one camp but acts in favor of another, which I feel is necessary to understand or at least admit.

0 votes     reply to comment
thekolokolone
thekolokolone Mar 19 2011, 8:40am replied:

Racism is still racism if you shout it out or not. Its still not right if you are racist, but you keep it in secret. Your example is a piece of **** man, go and bury yourself. If you ban something that is just a response for our sick reality, then you are a facist bastard!

-3 votes     reply to comment
DuckSauce
DuckSauce Mar 19 2011, 10:02am replied:

@SZilaJMaGGoT:
No one is banning anything, it got removed and the creators can continue to work on it and show that work.

Also way to go in butting in a debate that ended, with it being unclear who or what exactly you are screaming against is wrong, without an argument why and to top it off add a remark that's dangerously close to breaching ModDB's terms of use.

Please leave comments like "Kill/Bury yourself" out of this, I've seen no one imply anything that would even suggest fascism.

You however appear quite radical, you disagree with someone and then according to you doesn't deserve to live, I'm shocked and you are more like a fascist than whoever you were talking to.

Religion different then mine? DIE. Opinion different then mine? DIE.
See the resemblance?

Get some common sense man.

+5 votes     reply to comment
ScarT-
ScarT- Mar 19 2011, 7:13am buried:

(buried)

I'm pretty sure if we renamed the mod, and changed nothing more moddb, nor anyone else would have a problem against it. But as soon as the word "school" shows up, everybody got their panties in a bunch. Pathetic.

-7 votes     reply to comment
lasershock
lasershock Mar 19 2011, 7:22am buried:

(buried)

Please remove the statement that you support freedom of speech. Because you obviously do not.

-5 votes     reply to comment
SPTX
SPTX Mar 19 2011, 7:22am says:

The mod wasn't even polished, we were very far from school shooting, thus making that like banning Legos if someone comes to reproduce something shocking with them.

+1 vote     reply to comment
Crispy2theMAX
Crispy2theMAX Mar 19 2011, 7:23am says:

Jesus the mod was a piece of **** anyway. From what you could do already was just run in a simple building that looked nothing like a school and shoot up civilian models from HL2 was a ****** joke. I dont think they really had any intentions on working on it so quit being butthurt that one mod went down. Most of those devs were probably /b/tards anyway so it's not like it matters. Just move on.

+9 votes     reply to comment
BlueWolf72
BlueWolf72 Mar 19 2011, 7:31am says:

Regardless of free speech, moddb is and always will be a portal to list and promote what you are working on. This has nothing to do with "just cause I put it on moddb" I deserve to show the world. Whats next LittleBoysMod listed on the site. Get real peeps no one would expect that to last and while each mod is about shooting and killing, this is about family and respect. Respect that freedom.

+6 votes     reply to comment
Jokerme
Jokerme Mar 19 2011, 7:42am says:

So if Call of Duty does this it's just a game, but if some kids do this it's offending and disgusting. Way to go.

-4 votes     reply to comment
ProspectGames
ProspectGames Mar 19 2011, 8:07am buried:

(buried)

Yeah I've seen things in Black Ops which is terrible. There is a section where you torture and man by pucnching glass into his mouth! So many of our games have you do terrible things, but that's alright if you're a powerful corporation. As per usual "the little guy" gets **** on.

-5 votes     reply to comment
Jokerme
Jokerme Mar 19 2011, 8:38am replied:

There are lots of weird stuff in those games but I specifically mean the part you kill all the innocent people in an airport. It was modern warfare 2 i guess.

+2 votes     reply to comment
ProspectGames
ProspectGames Mar 19 2011, 8:45am replied:

I forgot all about that! Yes it caused controversy but suprise suprise! People got over it.

+1 vote     reply to comment
Post a Comment
click to sign in

You are not logged in, your comment will be anonymous unless you join the community today (totally free - or sign in with your social account on the right) which we encourage all contributors to do.

2000 characters limit; HTML formatting and smileys are not supported - text only

News
Browse
News
Report Abuse
Report article
Related Mods
School Shooter: North American Tour 2012 (Half-Life 2)
School Shooter: North American Tour 2012 Half-Life 2 - Single Player First Person Shooter
Related Games
Half-Life 2
Half-Life 2 Single & Multiplayer First Person Shooter
Related Groups
Checkerboarded Studios
Checkerboarded Studios Developer & Publisher with 5 members
ModDB
ModDB Official group with 3,849 members