Quick reminder: This is just a game, yeah?

[KinslayeR]

it was FAD not afina, noobs

[DarkOne]

About 4 hours a day max focus is the max.

That can be stretched quite a lot more if you actually have to (and if you get at least one solid break in between), but I'll agree it's not too healthy

[Anubis]

Even tho this thread started as a great msg to all wormers, it's slowly going off the railways with each new post. If it was really Afina we're talking here, maybe best is to delete this all. Never know how it will reflect on her mental state.

Yeh, let's just forget she tried to ruin a shitload of people's computers :x
Not that they didn't have it coming.. clicking on cheat software, but still..

And what ANO says, you cant be productive 24/7. About 4 hours a day max focus is the max. You need time to chill. And video games are just awesome. As is taking naps and just enjoying your life, cos that's what it's all about. Not about having burnouts when you're in the prime of your life and midlife crisis when you're 40.

When I am playing competitive games (or even single player games) I am also at max focus, so games are not always a way to relax. At least not for me. Watching streams is 100% relaxing to me, though.

[TheWalrus]

it was FAD not afina, noobs

Yeah, it wasn't though

[MonkeyIsland]

If CyberShadow wanted to give away the name, he would have done it in the original post. The point of this topic isn't "guess who".

[Peja]

The point of this topic isn't "guess who".

the point of this topic seems to be to shift the responsibility for someones life from the inner circle (yourself, family members, friends) to the outer circle (online community) which is quite insane. for each case like this, i could mention 3 examples of people finding help in our community during a rough time in real life. the intention of this topic might be good, but in the end its nothing more than to surrender to the old myth of games being responsible for your actions in combination with some weird neoliberal "work is everything" pathos.

[Hurz]

remember, columbine was marilyn manson not cs 

[Sensei]

Peja and CS are both so right with 2 totally opposite posts. It makes my head hurt.

[Dr Abegod]

The point of this topic isn't "guess who".

the point of this topic seems to be to shift the responsibility for someones life from the inner circle (yourself, family members, friends) to the outer circle (online community) which is quite insane. for each case like this, i could mention 3 examples of people finding help in our community during a rough time in real life. the intention of this topic might be good, but in the end its nothing more than to surrender to the old myth of games being responsible for your actions in combination with some weird neoliberal "work is everything" pathos.

+1

[ANO]

in Peja we trust, in CS we do not... always wondered who was and if he was real auhuah

[Mablak]

The point of this topic isn't "guess who".

the point of this topic seems to be to shift the responsibility for someones life from the inner circle (yourself, family members, friends) to the outer circle (online community) which is quite insane. for each case like this, i could mention 3 examples of people finding help in our community during a rough time in real life. the intention of this topic might be good, but in the end its nothing more than to surrender to the old myth of games being responsible for your actions in combination with some weird neoliberal "work is everything" pathos.

Is your argument really that we're not generally responsible for the effects of what we say online? I mean we're responsible for every action we take. Of course we're not responsible for completely unforeseeable effects (like say, someone committing suicide over an online dispute), but we can be responsible for emotional harm if we say pointlessly hurtful things. It's sometimes mostly the offended's responsibility to grow thicker skin, sometimes mostly on the offender to be more tactful, and usually both to differing extents, since responsibility isn't exclusive to one party. It's just about how each party ought to change.

I really see nothing wrong with the suggestion we all look at ourselves to see if any of us are taking this too seriously, or if we've said pointlessly hurtful things. The worst that could happen is that some of us realize, oh yeah, I should be less of a dick.

[Anubis]

The point of this topic isn't "guess who".

the point of this topic seems to be to shift the responsibility for someones life from the inner circle (yourself, family members, friends) to the outer circle (online community) which is quite insane. for each case like this, i could mention 3 examples of people finding help in our community during a rough time in real life. the intention of this topic might be good, but in the end its nothing more than to surrender to the old myth of games being responsible for your actions in combination with some weird neoliberal "work is everything" pathos.

Is your argument really that we're not generally responsible for the effects of what we say online? I mean we're responsible for every action we take. Of course we're not responsible for completely unforeseeable effects (like say, someone committing suicide over an online dispute), but we can be responsible for emotional harm if we say pointlessly hurtful things. It's sometimes mostly the offended's responsibility to grow thicker skin, sometimes mostly on the offender to be more tactful, and usually both to differing extents, since responsibility isn't exclusive to one party. It's just about how each party ought to change.

I really see nothing wrong with the suggestion we all look at ourselves to see if any of us are taking this too seriously, or if we've said pointlessly hurtful things. The worst that could happen is that some of us realize, oh yeah, I should be less of a dick.

What I was getting from Peja's post was, that you should not blame the entire community for the misfortune of someone's life that would be the same with or without W:A. If said person is mentally ill or has a rough life, I'd argue he would have the same problems regardless of W:As existence or even the internet as a whole. Reason being that you can always alt+f4 everything, it's a computer that you can shutdown. However, you can't just shutdown problems in real life with friends/family or yourself. If you do, it's called suicide/murder. For just about everyone games/internet is a blessing as it lets you be yourself, catalyst your bad feelings into good feelings or sometimes just be soft/hard in a real world where you usually can't be, and the most important thing: You can exit your internet "life" without affecting yours or anybody's health. You can be sick in real life but healthy online because no one can see you. For the same reason I could argue if someone has a huge grudge/mentally illness with someone in real life and he didn't be rude online he would channel his anger into something way worse. (actual murder) It's not a simple if everyone would be nice this would not have happened scenario, that is indeed insane.

[zippeurfou]

About 4 hours a day max focus is the max.

That can be stretched quite a lot more if you actually have to (and if you get at least one solid break in between), but I'll agree it's not too healthy

I agree with that. Would you by any chance know by any chance know any reliable paper about it. It seems to me it was one of theses things where researchers went back and forward.

[HHC]

Reason being that you can always alt+f4 everything, it's a computer that you can shutdown.

Don't agree with you on this one Anubis.
Even for mature ppl it's hard to shutdown a computer and deal with harsh online criticism/insults. For teens it's an entirely different case. They take every personal insult serious (they are more self-conscious.. and lack the self-esteem to put criticism on their person into perspective). Cyberbullying does cause a lot of harm.
And yeh, even for adults it can be hard, especially when there's some kind of truth involved.
And totally quitting the internet... i dunno, it's not healthy either, cause the feeling that the world hates you, or has something against you will remain.. and probably become even more persistent.

It's a boring, moralistic truth, but meh.. it's not un-true.

@DarkOne: yeah, I was just mentioning a random number, glad you agree though. If spending more than 4 hours on 'useful' stuff was completely useless I'm pretty sure schools and jobs would be max 4 hours now but they aren't. There's still another 8 hours or so that you can work at half brain-capacity .
The point is more that we are living in a meritocracy, which is nice cause it rewards good labour and doesn't judge on someone's ancestry or financial background. But at the same time, it's gone to an extreme where, in the absence of a religion or other system of values, people push themselves to work ever harder (because succeeding is the only thing that matters). Look at what's happening in IT companies... young people working 7 days a week, for about 10 hours a day doing really brain-intensive stuff. That is just not healthy, for anyone. And it's the kind of job you can do for about 4 years on Red Bulls and other stimuli, but after that it's gg. You only burn yourself up this way. And there isn't really anyone warning ppl against this. The only thing they say is, when you have a burnout, slowly build up again to the old level you were at. Errr..

DarkOne, i'm sure you've seen this (dutch) ad:

That's just so messed up. If my girl asked me that question I'd seriously slap the shit out of her.

[philie]

If my girl asked me that question I'd seriously slap the shit out of her.

... so what did she ask?