Basket.

Once in a while the time-honoured ST Forum gets letters so asinine I am tempted to believe they were written in jest. But I know I'm probably giving my fellow citizens a little too much credit.


Ban cyber-gaming (16 October)

I REFER to the report "They fly into a rage over online games" on Monday.

Gaming is a social ill with far more dire consequences than chewing gum.

Should we not ban cyber-gaming and get our teenagers to take up healthier and more constructive activities instead?

This is an age in which almost all homework is done on the computer. Students also send e-mail and chat online with their friends.

It is impossible to know when they are engaged in such activities and when they are gaming, unless one were to look over their shoulders every minute.

Locking their computers or limiting their gaming time is not feasible.

What do we lose by banning cyber games?


Let's begin by answering the last question: well, no, "we" - you, rather - won't lose anything with such a ban, if you don't mind exposing the severe deficiencies in your reasoning ability with such a high-handed and obviously illogical move. You won't lose anything if you don't mind being derided as a laughing stock only able to think in simplistic generalizations.

The premise of this letter is so patently absurd that tearing it apart feels almost like cheating. I can't read the original article our letter-writer refers to because the Straits Times is being... business-savvy... by charging money for it to be read, but from the title I take it that some people are taking their computer games a little too seriously and getting angry enough to cause notice and inconvenience to others. That, apparently, is enough reason for our letter-writer to call for nobody to be allowed to play computer games again, ever. Is this gaming rage a virus or something?

Personally - I haven't been on this planet very long, but one of the things I've learnt over and over is that human beings, in general, get angry very easily. And can get angry over virtually anything. Why do you think drinks machines usually carry the label - "DO NOT HIT OR TILT MACHINE"? Why do you think there are so many warnings on public transport places that any frustrations should not be taken out on the staff? Why are there numerous anger management courses readily available in virtually every single country in the world? Money has even been made out of specialty restaurants or events where people can take out their anger on things or willing punching-bags.

People get angry. That's the bottom line. A minority of these people get extremely angry and that is known as rage. It is a problem, for sure, but it is a problem that exists in every single discipline. We have road rage. We have air rage. People get abusive when paying their bills, when posting a letter, when calling technical support... you name it. Should we ban all of these things because a few users let their emotions get the better of them? Should we ban all motor vehicles and air travel?

The illogic, however, does not stop there. Our writer goes on to bemoan the fact that it is so difficult to turn one's home into a police state. Again, the point is missed entirely. If you are aiming to prevent your child from gaming for even one second during the day, then obviously the task is Herculean. But what good reason is there to do that? Like any other activity, gaming is only unhealthy when carried to excess. If someone is missing meals or sleep just to game, then he or she ought to be stopped. But an hour or two a day with the rest spent on essential activities? What is the problem with that?

Our writer then further demonstrates that she is, or will be, a lazy parent. She does not want any of her children or future children to play computer games, but rather than being responsible about it, she would like the state to do it for her. Do a bit of parenting please - if you want your child to turn out the way you would like, a bit of effort is obviously necessary.

Honestly, some people.