W.H.O. Seeks to Classify ‘Gaming Disorder’ as a Mental Illness

[WMGroomAK]

Just now, MageTank said:

I see that the people that complained about the source, didn't bother to at least check to see if others covered it. All I see is "this is right wing, this is alt right" without even bothering to humor the possibility that the information might be real, or at the very least, covered elsewhere.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/01/opinion/sunday/video-games-arent-addictive.html

 

NYT, far from "alt right", posted basically the same information.

Rather than immediately dismiss the sources and proclaim the information is false simply because of said source, actually look into it. I see no point in putting fourth the effort to dismiss the source, over putting in the effort to validate it.

Thanks!  Was just about to do a search myself for some extra sources...

[ivan134]

2 minutes ago, MageTank said:

I see that the people that complained about the source, didn't bother to at least check to see if others covered it. All I see is "this is right wing, this is alt right" without even bothering to humor the possibility that the information might be real, or at the very least, covered elsewhere.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/01/opinion/sunday/video-games-arent-addictive.html

 

NYT, far from "alt right", posted basically the same information.

Rather than immediately dismiss the sources and proclaim the information is false simply because of said source, actually look into it. I see no point in putting fourth the effort to dismiss the source, over putting in the effort to validate it.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said the info was false.

[MrDynamicMan]

Just now, Prysin said:

He only communicates through virtue-signaling and muh feels. 

I need to start a pronoun collection to go alongside my Pepe collection. 

 

Also, at this rate, Inb4 lock. 

[MageTank]

Just now, ivan134 said:

Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said the info was false.

Did I say you? Did I even quote or mention you? If I were targeting you, your name would be in my post. I don't hold back when addressing anyone on this forum. I spoke generally, because more than one person did it.

 

Now, don't put words in my mouth.

[ivan134]

1 minute ago, MageTank said:

Did I say you? Did I even quote or mention you? If I were targeting you, your name would be in my post. I don't hold back when addressing anyone on this forum. I spoke generally, because more than one person did it.

 

Now, don't put words in my mouth.

Who on this thread said the info was false?

[Atmos]

Just now, ivan134 said:

You clearly do care, but you've responded to me twice.

 

Whether they're correct or not is irrelevant to me. I'm not going to click it. I also don't click links from Kotaku or polygon because I don't want to give them traffic.

You're the problem with people in politics today. If the publication is on the wrong side of the fence you don't give a shit if they're publishing facts. You'll ignore it all the same.

 

However... here's a novel idea. Don't click on the link. Read a summery of the article and its sources, but don't just disregard first hand sources and fact because the source of publication was a site you dislike.

[the_spankles]

You guys are acting like 5 year olds. your fighting about something that has nothing to do with the topic.

[MageTank]

Just now, ivan134 said:

Who on this thread said the info was false?

Quoting wikipedia that directly mentioned "falsehoods" is where my mention of "false" came from. However, I did not attribute it to him, or anyone for that matter, because I was speaking in general. Also, if you'd pay just a little bit of attention, you would see the word "or" in there. This means that it could be either one, and not both. You may want to relax a little, you seem to be tightly wound. 

[ivan134]

2 minutes ago, Atmos said:

You're the problem with people in politics today. If the publication is on the wrong side of the fence you don't give a shit if they're publishing facts. You'll ignore it all the same.

 

However... here's a novel idea. Don't click on the link. Read a summery of the article and its sources, but don't just disregard first hand sources and fact because the source of publication was a site you dislike.

LOL. That's usually what happens when you have a shit reputation. Boy crying wolf and all that.

[Atmos]

6 minutes ago, the_spankles said:

You guys are acting like 5 year olds. your fighting about something that has nothing to do with the topic.

We would love to talk about the actual topic, believe me. But unfortunately there's people on here who don't care about facts. They only care if the publication caters to their own narrow political ideology. If it doesn't, or god forbid it preaches the opposite, then they'll refute anything and everything that they publish despite how well founded, researched, or written the publication is. This is a problem with both sides of the political spectrum, unfortunately though it seems to be growing ever larger a problem for leftist regressives.

[Jito463]

Just now, ivan134 said:

LOL. That's usually what happens when you have a s*** reputation. Boy crying wolf and all that.

Like the majority of the lame-stream media?  We have no objective media in this country anymore.  None.  I don't read Brietbart because they're massively pro-Trump, and I'm a conservative (those two do not go together).  I still wouldn't dismiss a story from them out of hand, just because I don't like their affiliations.

 

Also, regardless of the source of the story, it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

[the_spankles]

I know I agree with you on that. I should of posted from another source, I personally like this website, but there is alot of libs who hate it.

[N3v3r3nding_N3wb]

2 minutes ago, the_spankles said:

I know I agree with you on that. I should of posted from another source, I personally like this website, but there is alot of libs who hate it.

The problem isn't with you, it's with people who are disregarding the source without reading it.

[MageTank]

Aaaaand this thread is too political to be redeemed. This would have been an interesting thing to discuss, but alas, I fear it's too late. Before it gets nuked to oblivion, I'll at least post my opinion on the subject:

 

Everything is harmful without moderation. Even too much water is a bad thing. If "excessive gaming" is a disorder, then so is excessive anything. I know people that get their thrills doing far more dangerous things (street racing, fighting, etc) none of which are classified as a mental disorder. I am no doctor, but I feel that this is yet another scapegoat for people to blame video games for the problems that go on in this world. Much like video games are blamed on violence, poor grades, or basically anything that could also be attributed to bad parenting.

[LordWaffleGoblin]

2 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Everything is harmful without moderation. Even too much water is a bad thing.

I knew my water addiction would do me in one day.

[WMGroomAK]

2 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Everything is harmful without moderation. Even too much water is a bad thing. If "excessive gaming" is a disorder, then so is excessive anything. I know people that get their thrills doing far more dangerous things (street racing, fighting, etc) none of which are classified as a mental disorder. I am no doctor, but I feel that this is yet another scapegoat for people to blame video games for the problems that go on in this world. Much like video games are blamed on violence, poor grades, or basically anything that could also be attributed to bad parenting.

This is generally my opinion on the topic as well.  I guess my question is, would professional gamers who actually are in e-sports leagues and earn money at this or professional twitch streamers be required to attend some kind of counseling for medical insurance purposes if the WHO has this classified as an addiction.

[WMGroomAK]

Just now, LordWaffleGoblin said:

I knew my water addiction would do me in one day.

Just remember too much oxygen is also bad for you as well...  Have to fight that addiction to breathing. 

[the_spankles]

Guilty is charged for me. so give my handicap sticker so I can get my hot pockets and apple juice faster!

[MageTank]

1 minute ago, WMGroomAK said:

Just remember too much oxygen is also bad for you as well...  Have to fight that addiction to breathing. 

I'd rather see the WHO tackle cell phone/social media addiction first. You know, the kind of addiction that causes deaths on the freeways because people can't wait until they get home to talk to people? Nah, that won't help attack video games, the abyss from which all evil stems. 

 

1 minute ago, the_spankles said:

Guilty is charged for me. so give my handicap sticker so I can get my hot pockets and apple juice faster!

Apple juice?!?! YOU ARE A FRAUD. EVERYONE KNOWS GAMERS ONLY DRINK MOUNTAIN DEW!

[Urishima]

37 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

So I'd label this news website as not really trustworthy.

Neither is wikipedia at this point.

[the_spankles]

Pleas don't start again, we just got over that argument. 

[WMGroomAK]

2 minutes ago, MageTank said:

I'd rather see the WHO tackle cell phone/social media addiction first. You know, the kind of addiction that causes deaths on the freeways because people can't wait until they get home to talk to people?

But how else are you supposed to know what your best friends second cousin had for dessert??? (/s)  Seriously, social media and the ability for people to broadcast everything at any time without a filter to garner attention is a bigger issue.  I would actually enjoy reading more about schools instituting programs & parents being responsible for teaching online etiquette.

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, Wolther said:

It's an addiction, that's all it is. 

It's not. "playing a lot" is not an addiction.

[tlink]

you're trying to argue against well established science when you say that addiction isn't a mental disorder. you would have to come with very strong rational arguments why not to classify it as a mental disorder. why would we take your word over that of a huge clinical psychology community of which the very large majority says that its a mental illness. the medicine psychiatrists prescribe often is addicting, especially anxiety medication(benzodiazepine). people literally die from withdrawal of it and get addicted to it even when its regulated. simple reality of it is that consciousness and choice has little to do with the overall mechanics behind it. you can't fight an addiction without proper new cooping styles, not knowing isn't a choice, not being able to learn something isn't a choice. saying addiction is a choice is as stupid as saying that a baby not knowing how to talk is a choice. the limit is not your will, its your brain and the other fleshy goop. and no i know you're not saying addiction is a choice, but im  just putting it out there. choice is ethics. fleshy goop and brain is science.

 

13 hours ago, MageTank said:

I see that the people that complained about the source, didn't bother to at least check to see if others covered it. All I see is "this is right wing, this is alt right" without even bothering to humor the possibility that the information might be real, or at the very least, covered elsewhere.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/01/opinion/sunday/video-games-arent-addictive.html

 

NYT, far from "alt right", posted basically the same information.

Rather than immediately dismiss the sources and proclaim the information is false simply because of said source, actually look into it. I see no point in putting fourth the effort to dismiss the source, over putting in the effort to validate it.

i think most people where just reacting to someone actually getting their information from breibart unironically.

[tlink]

also what the actual f is this doing in tech news. this is not even news, let alone tech news.