Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Number47" data-source="post: 133197" data-attributes="member: 84">Just to be contrary, I have to say that the actual reading of the entire article is pretty harmless. There are a couple lines, said by a lawyer, about EverQuest itself being bad. Mostly the article was about how this guy had problems, how some people escape into online games and how the mother was looking for answers regarding he son's death. I think it is in very poor taste those people who say that she is greedy. Have you ever lost a loved one, especially in such a traumatic way? She talks about how she simply want some information from her son's account. She actually seems pretty knowledgable about the game, and doesn't say one word that is deragatory.Additional comment: I personally would love to see some of these tobacco CEO's actually tried for murder. Civil suits mean nothing to corporations, because all costs are passed onto consumers. Do you really think that any executive is going to lose any personal money for deciding that killing people for money with cigarettes is a good thing? (Obviously, I am talking about those guilty of actual conspiracy, but there is more than enough evidence of that). It's one thing to produce a dangerous product and warn people, it's quite another to try to bury the dangers, destroy evidence, pay off politicians and secretly increase addictiveness. Can anyone explain to me why these actions should not be construed as conspiracy to commit murder?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Number47, post: 133197, member: 84"] Just to be contrary, I have to say that the actual reading of the entire article is pretty harmless. There are a couple lines, said by a lawyer, about EverQuest itself being bad. Mostly the article was about how [i]this guy[/i] had problems, how [i]some people[/i] escape into online games and how the mother was looking for answers regarding he son's death. I think it is in very poor taste those people who say that she is greedy. Have you ever lost a loved one, especially in such a traumatic way? She talks about how she simply want some information from her son's account. She actually seems pretty knowledgable about the game, and doesn't say [i]one word[/i] that is deragatory. Additional comment: I personally would love to see some of these tobacco CEO's actually tried for murder. Civil suits mean nothing to corporations, because all costs are passed onto consumers. Do you really think that any executive is going to lose any personal money for deciding that killing people for money with cigarettes is a good thing? (Obviously, I am talking about those guilty of actual conspiracy, but there is more than enough evidence of that). It's one thing to produce a dangerous product and warn people, it's quite another to try to bury the dangers, destroy evidence, pay off politicians and secretly increase addictiveness. Can anyone explain to me why these actions should not be construed as conspiracy to commit murder? [/QUOTE]

Verification