Digg Annoys Me

So I came across a thread about a new method the ESRB is using to get better ratings out to parents for video games. Essentially they have a website where they display a bunch of descriptions of games, telling about their content with somewhat of a context. For example, instead of just looking at TF2 and seeing it it's rated "M" and a couple of descriptions why, it could say something like "a first person shooter where two teams compete with one another in an online environment. Contains significant amounts of blood and guts in a cartoonish context." et cetera.

Now, I don't see anything wrong with this. So a regulatory agency wants to put something out there that's pretty easy to access and all in one place. Nothing changes for the average person who buys video games, right? It's not even that they're making it harder for minors to purchase games of any stripe. But of course, there is somehow still irrational hatred for the ESRB trying to deliver more information to parents to allow them to make a more informed decision:

Why bother? NOTHING will satisfy the nanny groups until every game has been turned into a PG game. Sure she praises it now, until she needs to rile up her base and starts going on the evil of games again. I think we have learned a valuable lesson to how to stop the political madness. Get a campaign started to Give money to the opposition party during election cycles and explain exactly WHY you are doing it. If enough gamers/free speech supporters/etc band together and give money to political groups who support OUR view, politicians will quickly change their tune.

This kind of slippery slope argument is really, really stupid. Sorry, I'm not fan of censorship, not at all, but taking steps to inform more people is never bad.

There's always a backlash in the video game industry to school shootings, and video game advocates always say the same thing - that parents should be more responsible for what their kids are exposed to. This is true: parents are chiefly responsible for such things. The thing about this story is the fact that it allows parents to make more informed decisions. It doesn't restrict free speech. It doesn't make games "evil".

There's a reason why slippery slope is a fallacy. Way to go, Digg.

Speaking of Digg and their blind support for everything Ron Paul, apparently he appears on every "Choose Your Own Cabinet" list that the New York Times posted. He peaks at #3 for Treasury Secretary and is #7 on Secretary of State, where for Defense, Homeland Security, and Attorney General he's somewhere in the 4-6 area. People are really stupid. At least Noam Chomsky made it in the top 20 for Defense and State:

Foggy posted:
Would [Noam Chomsky] be better in defense or state

The New Zorker posted:
merge them, dep't. of power/linguistics