Re: Finally ... A Reason To Play Video Games ... LOL

[Guest guest]

I agree. Is like what Terminator said in the second movie of the saga: "It's on your nature...".VISIGOTH@... escribió: I've played Doom (all three editions) and Call of Duty. These did not make me any more angry or aggressive than usual. The Hitman series, on the other hand, did make me more angry and hostile. Years ago when the first Doom game was out, I had a friend in the Army Rangers. They used it to teach basic urban combat tactics. Any game could cause trouble and a lot of it depends on who is playing. Either a sore loser or a gloating winner can quickly make the game unbearable. Some of the childhood "friends" were like that. They would gloat, cheer and rub it in while they were ahead, but when the started to lose they'd get nasty. Not to mention that they would always cheat. The only amusing thing about the games is that eventually they would get so angry at each other that they would get in a fight. I doubt if they ever actually played a game through to the end. We're talking any game here from video games (which were just coming out), board games and even athletic games. I knew better than to play sports with them though since they always ganged up on me, being the smallest and that it would always end in a fight anyway. Jano C. Lora PazIPRI Leading Teacher

LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo.Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto.http://es.voice.

[Guest guest]

I agree. Is like what Terminator said in the second movie of the saga: "It's on your nature...".VISIGOTH@... escribió: I've played Doom (all three editions) and Call of Duty. These did not make me any more angry or aggressive than usual. The Hitman series, on the other hand, did make me more angry and hostile. Years ago when the first Doom game was out, I had a friend in the Army Rangers. They used it to teach basic urban combat tactics. Any game could cause trouble and a lot of it depends on who is playing. Either a sore loser or a gloating winner can quickly make the game unbearable. Some of the childhood "friends" were like that. They would gloat, cheer and rub it in while they were ahead, but when the started to lose they'd get nasty. Not to mention that they would always cheat. The only amusing thing about the games is that eventually they would get so angry at each other that they would get in a fight. I doubt if they ever actually played a game through to the end. We're talking any game here from video games (which were just coming out), board games and even athletic games. I knew better than to play sports with them though since they always ganged up on me, being the smallest and that it would always end in a fight anyway. Jano C. Lora PazIPRI Leading Teacher

LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo.Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto.http://es.voice.

[Guest guest]

At my last meeting at my son's school they informed me that they have

been role playing certain situations with my son and that by doing so

with him, he is coming up with his own solutions on how to deal with

things/situations.

I really think my son is developing and has better coping strategies

than I do - I learn a lot from him :-)

>

> I have often thought that skills teaching in a virtual environment

> would be helpful. I know (this could be exploited) Like in the sense

> of Arnold Swartzanegger movies. but driving simulation. Bulling

> simulation from the point of the bullied. I know it's too sci-fi and

> could be misused but human nature gets in the way of teaching

skills.

> So tired of not being able to implement something useful because

people

> abuse those things. Honesty consideration " sigh "

>

[Guest guest]

At my last meeting at my son's school they informed me that they have

been role playing certain situations with my son and that by doing so

with him, he is coming up with his own solutions on how to deal with

things/situations.

I really think my son is developing and has better coping strategies

than I do - I learn a lot from him :-)

>

> I have often thought that skills teaching in a virtual environment

> would be helpful. I know (this could be exploited) Like in the sense

> of Arnold Swartzanegger movies. but driving simulation. Bulling

> simulation from the point of the bullied. I know it's too sci-fi and

> could be misused but human nature gets in the way of teaching

skills.

> So tired of not being able to implement something useful because

people

> abuse those things. Honesty consideration " sigh "

>

[Guest guest]

Mmmmmmmmm I get frustrated with things, but rarely games.

However my son does get frustrated with games, but he is aware of

such and when he finds himself becoming so he takes a break now, or

switches to a less frustrating game. I have put in place a lot of

things for my son to limit stress and frustration and to help him

deal with such and now he is practically self regulating most of the

time.

>

> I'd like to throw my two cents in here, I personally have goten

violent after playing sonic on sega, it gets very frustrating to get

to a certain level and play it and play it and not get past it. I

have thrown controlers across the room or wanted to toss the TV out

the window. So I can understand even the simplest childs game being

considered violent. Its up to us as parents to decide what games our

children should play and how they are going to react. The easiest

way of doing this I have found personally is by playing with my

child. I or my husband play all of Jerry's games with him. We do

play some of the cartoon games with violence, but we play them

together and make sure he understands the contects. When he starts

to get overstimulated by any game I pull him off of the game and have

him do something else. It seems to work the best for us.

>

> Beth,

> co-administrator

[Guest guest]

Mmmmmmmmm I get frustrated with things, but rarely games.

However my son does get frustrated with games, but he is aware of

such and when he finds himself becoming so he takes a break now, or

switches to a less frustrating game. I have put in place a lot of

things for my son to limit stress and frustration and to help him

deal with such and now he is practically self regulating most of the

time.

>

> I'd like to throw my two cents in here, I personally have goten

violent after playing sonic on sega, it gets very frustrating to get

to a certain level and play it and play it and not get past it. I

have thrown controlers across the room or wanted to toss the TV out

the window. So I can understand even the simplest childs game being

considered violent. Its up to us as parents to decide what games our

children should play and how they are going to react. The easiest

way of doing this I have found personally is by playing with my

child. I or my husband play all of Jerry's games with him. We do

play some of the cartoon games with violence, but we play them

together and make sure he understands the contects. When he starts

to get overstimulated by any game I pull him off of the game and have

him do something else. It seems to work the best for us.

>

> Beth,

> co-administrator

[Guest guest]

" There was an era in television that seemed to end when I was

younger. In this era, people were taught how to reason through and

work out difficult problems. The solutions were never easy and never

mutually pleasing.

Shows these days teach that the only justice in the world comes

either through brute force or at the hands of a prejudicial judge. "

What about Star Trek TNG?

>

> " PD1: playing games like Doom, Halo, Resident Evil and the like has

> saved my life several times. In countries like mine, you survive or

> you die. "

>

> On the other hand, maybe if people were not exposed to such

violence

> on the news, on TV, on radio, in movies, and on video games, people

> would not be so inclined to be violent in the first place.

>

> There was an era in television that seemed to end when I was

> younger. In this era, people were taught how to reason through and

> work out difficult problems. The solutions were never easy and

never

> mutually pleasing.

>

> Shows these days teach that the only justice in the world comes

> either through brute force or at the hands of a prejudicial judge.

>

> I do wish people would take a look at the world and ask themselves

> if this is truly what they want for it. Are people happy in this

> sort of world? I don't think so. And the world is only getting

worse.

>

> Tom

> Administrator

>

[Guest guest]

I loved that show. ^-^greebohere <julie.stevenson16@...> escribió: "There was an era in television that seemed to end when I was younger. In this era, people were taught how to reason through and work out difficult problems. The solutions were never easy and never mutually pleasing. Shows these days teach that the only justice in the world comes either through brute force or at the hands of a prejudicial judge."What about Star Trek TNG?> > "PD1: playing games like Doom, Halo, Resident Evil and the like has > saved my life several times. In countries like mine, you survive or > you die."> > On the other hand, maybe if people were not exposed to such violence > on the news, on TV, on radio, in movies, and on video games, people > would not be so inclined to be violent in the first place. > > There was an era in television that seemed to end when I was > younger. In this era, people were taught how to reason through and > work out difficult problems. The solutions were never easy and never

> mutually pleasing. > > Shows these days teach that the only justice in the world comes > either through brute force or at the hands of a prejudicial judge. > > I do wish people would take a look at the world and ask themselves > if this is truly what they want for it. Are people happy in this > sort of world? I don't think so. And the world is only getting worse.> > Tom> Administrator>Jano C. Lora PazIPRI Leading Teacher

LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo.Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto.http://es.voice.

[Guest guest]

I loved that show. ^-^greebohere <julie.stevenson16@...> escribió: "There was an era in television that seemed to end when I was younger. In this era, people were taught how to reason through and work out difficult problems. The solutions were never easy and never mutually pleasing. Shows these days teach that the only justice in the world comes either through brute force or at the hands of a prejudicial judge."What about Star Trek TNG?> > "PD1: playing games like Doom, Halo, Resident Evil and the like has > saved my life several times. In countries like mine, you survive or > you die."> > On the other hand, maybe if people were not exposed to such violence > on the news, on TV, on radio, in movies, and on video games, people > would not be so inclined to be violent in the first place. > > There was an era in television that seemed to end when I was > younger. In this era, people were taught how to reason through and > work out difficult problems. The solutions were never easy and never

> mutually pleasing. > > Shows these days teach that the only justice in the world comes > either through brute force or at the hands of a prejudicial judge. > > I do wish people would take a look at the world and ask themselves > if this is truly what they want for it. Are people happy in this > sort of world? I don't think so. And the world is only getting worse.> > Tom> Administrator>Jano C. Lora PazIPRI Leading Teacher

LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo.Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto.http://es.voice.

[Guest guest]

Roleplay rocks. ^-~greebohere <julie.stevenson16@...> escribió: At my last meeting at my son's school they informed me that they have been role playing certain situations with my son and that by doing so with him, he is coming up with his own solutions on how to deal with things/situations.I really think my son is developing and has better coping strategies than I do - I learn a lot from him :-)>> I have often thought that skills teaching in a virtual environment > would be helpful. I know (this could be exploited) Like in the sense > of Arnold Swartzanegger movies. but driving simulation. Bulling > simulation from the point of the bullied. I know it's too sci-fi and > could be misused but human nature gets in the way of teaching skills. > So tired of not being able to implement something useful because people > abuse those things. Honesty consideration "sigh">Jano C. Lora PazIPRI Leading Teacher

LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo.Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto.http://es.voice.

[Guest guest]

Roleplay rocks. ^-~greebohere <julie.stevenson16@...> escribió: At my last meeting at my son's school they informed me that they have been role playing certain situations with my son and that by doing so with him, he is coming up with his own solutions on how to deal with things/situations.I really think my son is developing and has better coping strategies than I do - I learn a lot from him :-)>> I have often thought that skills teaching in a virtual environment > would be helpful. I know (this could be exploited) Like in the sense > of Arnold Swartzanegger movies. but driving simulation. Bulling > simulation from the point of the bullied. I know it's too sci-fi and > could be misused but human nature gets in the way of teaching skills. > So tired of not being able to implement something useful because people > abuse those things. Honesty consideration "sigh">Jano C. Lora PazIPRI Leading Teacher

LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo.Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto.http://es.voice.

[Guest guest]

What video games does your son usually play? I usually play Risk and win. God bless, Irelan

The fish are biting.

Get more visitors on your site using Search Marketing.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/8/2007 12:33:04 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kyorus06@... writes:

That's the reason why I love this group: you can (95% of the times) reason with PEOPLE, an specie that is growing scarce among humanity. ^-~

I blame that on modern education. Today it is all about self-esteem at any cost. This was done because so many kids were "hurt" by the system. Unfortunately it has had the opposite effect. Kids are full of false self-esteem with little to back it up. They have no real accomplishments and little real education. So, they are edgier and more hostile to perceived slights. So, today they fight at the drop of a hat over anything.

They also aren't taught how to reason and debate. It is all about emotion, especially about feeling good about themselves. Many have probably never had their views challenged because that wasn't allowed. Out in the world, they have their opinions that they have never had to defend and are indeed incapable of defending because they don't have the knowledge base or skill to handle a reasoned debate. So, when questioned, they get angry and go into an emotional tirade.

I agree reasoned debate and coming to a consensus is a dying art, and as it dies, so goes civility and the ability to discuss and solve problems.

[Guest guest]

Wasn't sure if you were asking me? but he like Rayman too :-) and

sonic, Mmmmmmm trying to think of the others. Sims. Brain slowing down

a bit now, it getting late in UK, supposedly the big freeze tonight

here (weather wise), athough I think my brain freezing up too :-)

>

> What video games does your son usually play? I usually play Risk and

win.

> God bless, Irelan

>

>

> ---------------------------------

> The fish are biting.

> Get more visitors on your site using Search Marketing.

>

[Guest guest]

Wasn't sure if you were asking me? but he like Rayman too :-) and

sonic, Mmmmmmm trying to think of the others. Sims. Brain slowing down

a bit now, it getting late in UK, supposedly the big freeze tonight

here (weather wise), athough I think my brain freezing up too :-)

>

> What video games does your son usually play? I usually play Risk and

win.

> God bless, Irelan

>

>

> ---------------------------------

> The fish are biting.

> Get more visitors on your site using Search Marketing.

>

[Guest guest]

I said:

" Shows these days teach that the only justice in the world comes

either through brute force or at the hands of a prejudicial judge. "

responded:

" What about Star Trek TNG? "

There are exceptions to every rule. This is one of them. But the show

is no longer being produced is it?

Tom

Administrator

[Guest guest]

" But the show is no longer being produced is it? "

Mmmmmmmmm don't know, probably not - but I still keep catching re-runs

of it on one of the cable channels :-)

>

> I said:

>

> " Shows these days teach that the only justice in the world comes

> either through brute force or at the hands of a prejudicial judge. "

>

> responded:

>

> " What about Star Trek TNG? "

>

> There are exceptions to every rule. This is one of them. But the show

> is no longer being produced is it?

>

> Tom

> Administrator

>

[Guest guest]

" I blame that on modern education. Today it is all about self-esteem

at any cost. This was done because so many kids were " hurt " by the

system. Unfortunately it has had the opposite effect. Kids are full

of false self-esteem with little to back it up. They have no real

accomplishments and little real education. So, they are edgier and

more hostile to perceived slights. So, today they fight at the drop

of a hat over anything. "

Okay, you probably won't believe this, but one of my professors in

college was the co-inventor of one of the techniques used today in

modern teaching practices on the elementary, middle school, and

secondary school levels.

The technique was called " Positive Reinforcement " (It may be called

something different now) and was based on the idea that humans are

in essence complex Pavlovian dogs that can be motivated by immediate

rewards for good behavior, or immediate removal of favorable stimuli

to punish bad behavior.

The idea was that when a child behaved or misbehaved, you caught it

quickly and immediately and addressed it.

In other words, if the child did as s/he was told or exceled at

something, you complimented and praised the child right away.

If the child misbehaved or fell short of the mark, you caught that

right away and addressed it.

And you were to do this over and over again until it was reinforced

in the child's mind which behaviors were acceptable and

unacceptable, and until the desired behaviors persisted and the

undesired behaviors ended.

But even then, my college professor warned us that this techniques

was being misunderstood by educators who believed that Positive

Reinforcement was simply the quick complimenting of students for

work well done while leaving any and all bad behaviors unaddressed.

The mistake, I think, was naming the technique " POSITIVE

Reinforcement " instead of something like " Quick Behavioral

Reinforcement. " (I can't think of anything snappier at the moment,

but this comes close.)

So today we have educators who have mis-understood the technique who

are teaching in our schools, and passing on this incorrect teaching

technique to other educators.

Now here is the what baffles me: Who screwed up in the way they

taught the method in the first place?

Or...

Were some of the (then) educators- in-training mis-understanding the

point and intent of the technique?

I have applied the technique in its proper form and construct during

my clinical experiences and observations. Good behavior could be

seen improving among students within the course of only one week's

time and bad behavior decreased in that time period as well.

Yet I cannot tell you the number of times I have heard anecdotes

from my cousins, and also people in the FAM Family Forum talking

about the out of control kids in their kids' classrooms due to all

this " nicey nicey fluff " and lack of punishment for anything bad

that is done.

Tom

Administrator

[Guest guest]

" Finally, the US acted on a UN mandate to deal with Sadaam. We did

and the world complained and hasn't stopped. Personally, I think

Iraq was a mistake. It is tying up too much of our forces and the US

has a pitiful lack of patience for long wars. "

,

Being a war buff as you are, and a follower of the American and

world political psyche, I just wondered if you have noticed these

three slight hypocrisies that I have noticed:

1) Even as the world whines about the US meddling in Iraq, they are

quick to praise the British and Canadian efforts on their work in

the US led war in Afghanistan.

2) US citizens continue to complain about the fact that the Iraq war

is nearly four years old but seem to forget that we have been

fighting in Afghanistan now for nearly SIX years.

3) That while we have lost 3,114 Americans in the war on Iraq, we

have so far lost 353 Americans in Afghanistan and lose more every

day yet you don't hear anyone complaining about it.

Here are some stats that might be useful to folks who may be reading

this:

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/

" There have been 3,368 coalition deaths -- 3,114 Americans, two

Australians, 131 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, six Danes, two Dutch, two

Estonians, one Fijian, one Hungarian, 32 Italians, one Kazakh, three

Latvian, 18 Poles, two Romanians, five Salvadoran, four Slovaks, 11

Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians -- in the war in Iraq as of

February 8, 2007, according to a CNN count. "

<snip>

At least 23,417 U.S. troops have been wounded in action, according

to the Pentagon.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2004/oef.casualties/

" There have been 512 coalition deaths -- 353 Americans, one

Australian, 46 Britons, 44 Canadians, three Danes, three Dutch, nine

French, 18 Germans, nine Italians, one Norwegian, one Portuguese,

four Romanians, 18 Spaniards, two Swedes -- in the war on terror as

of February 8, 2007, according to a CNN count. The troops died in

support of the U.S.-led Operation Enduring Freedom or were part of

the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in

Afghanistan. At least 1,110 U.S. personnel have been wounded in

action, according to the Pentagon. "

My personal belief is that Afghanistan will become the Korea

(meaning a " forgotten war " ) of our time, which is a pity, because we

are actually almost winning there, and according to the stats found

on CNN if you click on

" View the list of casualties in the war in Iraq and examine U.S. war

casualties dating back to the Revolutionary War. "

The Afghan War has the lowest casualty figures of any war in US

history.

The Persian Gulf War lasted from 1990-1991 and had 382 American

deaths. The Afghanistan war has lasted from Oct 7, 2001 until today

and has 353 American deaths.

I personally wonder how many Americans realize we are still fighting

in Afghanistan.

The media is not any help either.

Periodically, I will hear on the news...

" Four US soldiers will killed when an IED exploded beside their

HumVee today. "

The next day in the newspaper there will be a huge lengthy

article: " Four Soldiers Killed in Iraq. "

And three pages later there will be a one line paragraph wedged

underneath a bunch of advertising that says: " AP- A Marine on a

scouting mission was killed in Afghanistan when he was hit by enemy

sniper fire. US officials refused to release details pending

nortification of family and friends. "

You wait a few days and no " details " ever appear.

Tom

Administrator

[Guest guest]

Once again, I agree completely.VISIGOTH@... escribió: In a message dated 2/8/2007 12:33:04 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kyorus06 (DOT) es writes: That's the reason why I love this group: you can (95% of the times) reason with PEOPLE, an specie that is growing scarce among humanity.

^-~ I blame that on modern education. Today it is all about self-esteem at any cost. This was done because so many kids were "hurt" by the system. Unfortunately it has had the opposite effect. Kids are full of false self-esteem with little to back it up. They have no real accomplishments and little real education. So, they are edgier and more hostile to perceived slights. So, today they fight at the drop of a hat over anything. They also aren't taught how to reason and debate. It is all about emotion, especially about feeling good about themselves. Many have probably never had their views challenged because that wasn't allowed. Out in the world, they have their opinions that they have never had to defend and are indeed incapable of defending because they don't have the knowledge base or skill to handle a reasoned debate. So, when questioned, they get angry and go into an emotional

tirade. I agree reasoned debate and coming to a consensus is a dying art, and as it dies, so goes civility and the ability to discuss and solve problems. Jano C. Lora PazIPRI Leading Teacher

LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo.Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto.http://es.voice.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/9/2007 2:46:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, no_reply writes:

I played chess a lot when I was in college and enjoyed it quite a bit. That was where I first learned it and I picked it up fairly quickly.

I was never very good at chess for some reason. Military board games, on the other hand, I was very good at. Whether they were squad level or whole armies I won more than I lost. That was kind of a bad things though since people stopped wanting to play me.

[Guest guest]

Games- "A reason to play video games" thread. There are reasons to play other kinds of games as well... When I was young I kind of got pulled into playing a lot of tournament chess. Partly it was because of an older brother who played, and partly it was because I had a strong natural talent for it and won several important scholastic tournaments in the state. Never really enjoyed it all that much, but it did get me out socializing much more than I would have otherwise. (I would have just read alone all day- all month- all year- all life long just about!) Throughout my life my connections to the chess world kept me associating with people who loved board games and games in general. So for example, for about ten years when I was living in Los Angeles I was a regular attendee of all the big gaming conventions held

there. (Think dungeons and dragons, Diplomacy- more on that in a moment, Avalon Hill games generally, military war-gaming fanatics and historical buffs, and on and on. Very different are the Las Vegas type gaming conventions- the two types have nothing to do with each other.) Some of the things I learned over the years from playing tournament chess- I learned that I was like most people in that my brain reached a limit on how well I could play chess. I could push it farther, like when I was getting lots of exercise, sleep, chess-study and training and so on. I even turned in some professional level tournament results for awhile. But ultimately my brain had a big flaw in that compared to other high-ranked players I had strong ADHD tendencies- my mind would wander a lot and "space-out", resulting in making far more outright serious blunders than

others at my playing level. If not for that weakness I could, I think, very possibly have been a professional. (There are roughly speaking a dozen or so in the US.) So I learned something about my brain (eventually), and a little humility. At first when I started playing tournaments my stomach would be in knots... I had serious excitability problems. That went away after the first five or so tournaments. So I learned to be calm in those competitive situations, and that seemed later to transfer over to being somewhat calmer than I might have otherwise been in later various kinds of sports competitions. At first I felt really, really badly about beating opponents. Often I'd be playing some adult who was overconfident about playing a teenager. And I'd just absolutely crush them, and watch as their faces turned into caricatures of

sadness and depression. I could hardly bear it and almost gave up the game. But I learned after the first few tournaments that only opponents that were not very experienced in tournaments tended to react so negatively to losing games. After you've played in enough tournaments to have lost a dozen or so games it's no where near as big a deal emotionally. So I learned to view people who overreacted to losing as being people who had not had enough experience losing and so needed more! (LOL.) I still felt kind of badly about it, but nothing at all like how I felt at first. Much later on my Dad watched me play in a tournament and remarked that he always misinterpreted my facial expressions about whether I had just won or lost a game. I think it's because I never really got over feeling badly for my opponent losing. In my thirties I was in a large company golf tournament... when fellow workers who otherwise had always seemed pretty sane and rational started throwing golf

clubs and generally acting like little babies I was positively stunned in amazement. It made me realize how much playing chess had influenced my, well good sportsmanship, generally. In the five factor model of personality, currently the dominant paradigm in the research literature, a low score on the agreeableness factor is generally associated with being highly competitive. Somehow I think I have developed into a highly competitive individual and yet in other ways have always been a rather agreeable person-- the net result on a personality test I took was I was right in the middle of the agreeableness scale. But for me competitiveness is about challenging myself, pushing my own limits, and hardly at all about other people. Part of the struggle to get better at chess is learning to push your mind in new ways. A lot of players just keep training the same way, doing the same things. They generally reach a

ceiling fairly early on. At one point I studied Koltanowski's Blindfold Chess. There are several very interesting mental exercises in that book. Many people with AS are highly visual-spatial, and I am one of those. Mostly I was just lucky, but I never lost a game of blindfold chess, i.e. where I had my back to the board and the moves were called out to me though the other player could see the board. I even won all the games in a blindfold simultaneous I played (ahem)... but that's rather misleading since there were only two opponents! (Digression- If there are any players out there interested in learning to play blindfold, Koltanowski's book is excellent for visual-spatial thinkers, but even so for most players it's about memory-- If you find you can regularly play over from memory a game you have just played then you're probably ready to start playing blindfold chess.) I mention the blindfold chess

for several reasons- and the following observation. Around that same time I was given a cultural-bias free IQ test in order to qualify for a small scholarship. They just sat me down and didn't tell me what the test was for. At first I thought it was to see if I had dyslexia. Each problem had a shape and you had to find the closest corresponding shape from a series of other shapes. I finished in 12 minutes what had taken everyone else who had done the exam the full hour or nearly the full hour. I vaguely recall soemthing about having to decide between two choices by flipping through the fourth dimension or something really weird like that. Anyway, I got a perfect score. I'm almost certain the exercises with the blindfold chess had something to do with that!! Because I played chess a lot, and through happenstance, I wound up getting involved with giant wargaming conventions in Los Angeles and so on. Someone on

the list mentioned Risk. The equivalent but much more deep and complex version of Risk at gaming conventions is Diplomacy. It's always played with seven players, since that keeps the "balance of power" shifting mostly around alliances of three vs four and so makes for the most interesting play. I tried playing that for a couple of years at tournaments, expressly in order to try to improve my almost non-existent people-skills. I eventually got a few moderately successfull results, but mostly through playing it like a chess game. (Which is what Risk often devolves into I think.) The people who did best at the Diplomacy tournaments all seemed to be people who did a lot of negotiating in real life- lawyers, small businessmen, salesmen, and a couple of people who claimed to do international relations (IR) for the State Department at one time. I don't recall ever winning a game, but out of a few dozen tournaments I think I got "Best Italy" twice. (By the way, with the

growth of the internet there are sites where people play Diplomacy by email quite a lot. Probably search on terms Avalon Hill Diplomacy. There is a "gunboat" version where no communications, or very limited communications between players is allowed- thus minimizing the negotiations aspect. For me that kind of defeats the purpose of playing the game, but it seems to be a popular way to play it.) Video games- My nephew, who I think has extremely strong AS traits, is said to be a computer online game addict. His favorite game is Wolrd of Warcraft online. That seems to be the thing right now. Heph greebohere <julie.stevenson16@...> wrote: Wasn't sure if you were asking me? but he like Rayman too :-) and sonic, Mmmmmmm trying to think of the others. Sims. Brain slowing down a bit now, it getting late in UK, supposedly the big freeze tonight here (weather wise), athough I think my brain freezing up too :-)>> What video games does your son usually play? I usually play Risk and win.> God bless, Irelan> > >

---------------------------------> The fish are biting.> Get more visitors on your site using Search Marketing.> Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know. Ask your question on

Answers.

Need Mail bonding?Go to the Q&A for great tips from Answers users.

[Guest guest]

Environmental wrote- The mistake, I think, was naming the technique "POSITIVE Reinforcement" instead of something like "Quick Behavioral Reinforcement. " (I can't think of anything snappier at the moment, but this comes close.) Hmm.. How about "Rapid Reinforcement"? Heph environmental1st2003 <no_reply > wrote: "I blame that on modern education. Today it is all about self-esteem at any cost. This was done because so many kids were "hurt" by the system. Unfortunately it has had the opposite effect. Kids are full of false self-esteem with little to back it up. They have no real accomplishments and little real education. So, they are edgier and more hostile to perceived slights. So, today they fight at the drop of a hat over anything."Okay, you probably won't believe this, but one of my professors in college was the co-inventor of one of the techniques used today in modern teaching practices on the elementary, middle school, and secondary school levels. The technique was called "Positive Reinforcement" (It may be called something

different now) and was based on the idea that humans are in essence complex Pavlovian dogs that can be motivated by immediate rewards for good behavior, or immediate removal of favorable stimuli to punish bad behavior.The idea was that when a child behaved or misbehaved, you caught it quickly and immediately and addressed it. In other words, if the child did as s/he was told or exceled at something, you complimented and praised the child right away. If the child misbehaved or fell short of the mark, you caught that right away and addressed it. And you were to do this over and over again until it was reinforced in the child's mind which behaviors were acceptable and unacceptable, and until the desired behaviors persisted and the undesired behaviors ended.But even then, my college professor warned us that this techniques was being misunderstood by educators who believed that Positive

Reinforcement was simply the quick complimenting of students for work well done while leaving any and all bad behaviors unaddressed. The mistake, I think, was naming the technique "POSITIVE Reinforcement" instead of something like "Quick Behavioral Reinforcement." (I can't think of anything snappier at the moment, but this comes close.)So today we have educators who have mis-understood the technique who are teaching in our schools, and passing on this incorrect teaching technique to other educators. Now here is the what baffles me: Who screwed up in the way they taught the method in the first place? Or... Were some of the (then) educators- in-training mis-understanding the point and intent of the technique? I have applied the technique in its proper form and construct during my clinical experiences and observations. Good behavior could be seen improving among students within

the course of only one week's time and bad behavior decreased in that time period as well. Yet I cannot tell you the number of times I have heard anecdotes from my cousins, and also people in the FAM Family Forum talking about the out of control kids in their kids' classrooms due to all this "nicey nicey fluff" and lack of punishment for anything bad that is done.TomAdministratorHephaestus Clubfoothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephaestushttp://www.pantheon.org/articles/h/hephaestus.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabeiroi

Finding fabulous fares is fun.Let FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains.

[Guest guest]

Tom wrote: " The mistake, I think, was naming the technique " POSITIVE

Reinforcement " instead of something like " Quick Behavioral

Reinforcement. " (I can't think of anything snappier at the moment,

but this comes close.)

Heph answered: " Hmm.. How about " Rapid Reinforcement " ? "

I'm in a rush to dash off to a business meeting (yes, I checked in

here first before heading out ... LOL) but when I get back, Heph, I

will provide you with an example of " Rapid Reinforcement " as it

applies to Cub. Hahahaha!

Raven

Co-Administrator

[Guest guest]

" There are reasons to play other kinds of games as well...

" When I was young I kind of got pulled into playing a lot of

tournament chess. "

I played chess a lot when I was in college and enjoyed it quite a

bit. That was where I first learned it and I picked it up fairly

quickly.

I would characterize myself as a better than average player. (Even

though I did not play that often, I seemed to quite often beat folks

whom had been playing it for years.)

I don't think I even remotely approach your skill level, Heph, but

the rewarding thing about chess for me was that I never expected I

could be so good at it. Up until that point, I had been a spectator

a few times, and the game had looked more complex than I could

fathom.

It was pleasing for me to attempt playing it for the first

time " just for the fun of it " and discover I could beat my opponent.

And it was pleasing for me to play more challenging opponents and

win.

I never would have discovered this skill I have unless I had given

chess a try.

Tom

Administrator