Autistic Xbox Player's Mother Admits He Cheated

[Gitty101]

And so the status quo is restored. At least he's been given a chance to start again...

 

[Jeffro Tull]

Despite the utter confusion this issue has caused, Microsoft at least had a decent offer on the table. All in all I think it worked out fairly well for both parties.

 

[ReiverCorrupter]

Snip snip-

Check the law: ignorance of it is no excuse for breaking it. Assuming the kid didn't know what he was doing was wrong (which, as I should point out, has nothing to do with the fact the kid is austistic; any young kid probably wouldn't know what cheating is...), the mature thing to do would've been to say "Well I didn't know that was cheating but I do for next time".

Now assuming the kid was incapable of understanding what he did was cheating, it would be up to the mother to make that call for him. The article quite clearly stated the mother warned her kid against what he was doing, so your argument really holds no water.

Don't get me wrong, there are some rules I don't agree with. For example, I believe it is disgusting down here in Australia gays are not allowed to get married. However, I fully believe that breaking the law is grounds for just punishment for doing so.

I'm so tired of people like you trying to put people with disabilities on some kind of pedastal. I've seen plenty of cases where people, without any form of disability, have done something with their Xbox they weren't aware was considered cheating. Why should this austistic kid get his points back over those other people?

You cannot have one set of rules for one person, and another set of rules for everyone else. As I've said before, the fact this kid was autistic has less than nothing to do with this case; any young kid probably wouldn't understand what this kid did would be considered as cheating. It would be up to the mother to prevent her kid from doing it, and if the mother also didn't know then that sucks for the kid, but by no means does that mean he should get his points back.

*sigh* If a mentally retarded person does something wrong, I expect them to get some form of punishment. If a normal person does something wrong, I expect them to get some form of punishment. Obviously, there would be differing circumstances in some cases (what pleading insanity is for, afterall). However, no one should be allowed to do something wrong and get off scott free.

But hey, it's good to see the mother's desperate attempt for sympathy has worked on you. Any young kid would probably look at this and say "Well I don't understand what I did was cheating", but just because the kid is austistic you feel he should be given a free ride.

Hell take it even further, you punish a little kid for anything and chances are they're going to have no idea what they did was wrong (until you punish them for it enough times, they get the picture).

My entire point was about agency. Ignorance of the law, and the incapability to understand the law are two different things. Do we punish a train for crashing and killing people? No, because it's a frigging train. If the autistic kid is capable of understanding the situation and just hasn't learned to, then yes, punishing him actually accomplishes something. But if he just isn't going to understand anyway, then there's no real point other than upholding some grand abstracted idea of 'Justice' or personal vengeance.

Why? Why do people cling to these ideas of objective morality? It's all just a construct. There's just no need to have stringent un-bendable codes. Each situation is different, the more adaptable the system the better off it is. Now I don't know if you have this in Australia, but in America we have a thing called 'jury nullification'. This happens when the entire jury finds the law to be lacking in the particular situation, they vote the defendant innocent, even though he or she is guilty under the law. To clarify, this isn't a term that just describes what sometimes happens in spite of the law, IT IS PART OF THE LAW. The law is bendable because it does not arise out of some sort of eternal metaphysical code of right and wrong, but out of the needs of society.

But you don't seem to understand that I'm making a more general point. In this situation, the mother did cheat, and the kid may very well know what he did was wrong, in which case he should have been punished because it means that he won't do it next time. But that being said, I feel more sympathy for the kid because of his situation. Really the mother is the one who is really morally culpable, and she's the one who will know better for next time.

One final thing. People with disabilities should get special treatment. The special treatment should just be proportional to the disability. You wouldn't say a paraplegic is a bad person for not pulling someone out of a burning car would you? They can't. A person with Tourette's should be excused for shouting obscenities. Etc. Etc. If the autistic person doesn't understand what they're doing, they should be excused as well. Notice I am saying "doesn't understand what they're doing" which is different from simply being ignorant of the law.

First and foremost how is MS supposed to keep track of millions of people with all their disabilities? Or let everyone else know that we are supposed to treat them proportionally because of it? Would it be better if on his gamertag "excuse my achievements being out of order because I have autism." This is of course after we all are subjected to a battery of psychological exams before we are allowed to sign up to Live in the first place. Since you can't have people claiming they have a disability to get this special treatment in the first place. Or maybe MS could add a new type of gamer. Right now there is stuff like underground and family and such. Why not make a new server and call it something like Special? Then we can keep them away from the "normal" players and they can do whatever they want. Lets just take away one of the last places where people with mental disabilities are treated equally and fairly. Where they aren't subjected to being put in the special class and being told how different they are. I mean that is the only fair way to make sure they are protected from the "normals". And the "normals" are protected from them. Afterall that is why we have Special Olympics and Special classes. They can't keep up with the "normals" and the "normals" shouldn't have to slow down for them. So lets just keep them seperated all together.

I don't know about you but to me that sounds quite offensive. And by far worse than having you achievements taken away and getting smacked with a label of exactly what you are. A cheater regardless if you know better or not.

I'm sorry that facts offend you. They have the special Olympics because paraplegics in wheelchairs can't keep up with world-class sprinters. Life isn't fair, some people are better at some things than others. You don't need to build in a special system for autistic people, the company can basically do whatever it wants, if some mother complains that her child was unaware of what he was doing (imagine a scenario in which the mother didn't know, and the kid doesn't understand what cheating is), then they could give them special treatment. If the child is affected that much by it, the mother can send in letters to the company with proof, (i.e. a letter from her child's psychologist that says he's incapable of understanding what cheating is). I guess you also think that blind people shouldn't be allowed to bring their seeing eye dogs into restaurants that generally ban animals. That's a special case right? They should be treated as equals and be allowed to stumble around and spill hot coffee on themselves right? Do we really need to feed ourselves this lie that everyone is equal in spite of the facts?

 

[teisjm]

They're giving her a new tag and a free month? they're rewarding her for trying to make the look like bad guys?

If she cares about her son, it's not really much harder, than just making a new account for him... then he can play online again without beeing marked as a cheater.

 

[squid5580]

Snip snip-

Check the law: ignorance of it is no excuse for breaking it. Assuming the kid didn't know what he was doing was wrong (which, as I should point out, has nothing to do with the fact the kid is austistic; any young kid probably wouldn't know what cheating is...), the mature thing to do would've been to say "Well I didn't know that was cheating but I do for next time".

Now assuming the kid was incapable of understanding what he did was cheating, it would be up to the mother to make that call for him. The article quite clearly stated the mother warned her kid against what he was doing, so your argument really holds no water.

Don't get me wrong, there are some rules I don't agree with. For example, I believe it is disgusting down here in Australia gays are not allowed to get married. However, I fully believe that breaking the law is grounds for just punishment for doing so.

I'm so tired of people like you trying to put people with disabilities on some kind of pedastal. I've seen plenty of cases where people, without any form of disability, have done something with their Xbox they weren't aware was considered cheating. Why should this austistic kid get his points back over those other people?

You cannot have one set of rules for one person, and another set of rules for everyone else. As I've said before, the fact this kid was autistic has less than nothing to do with this case; any young kid probably wouldn't understand what this kid did would be considered as cheating. It would be up to the mother to prevent her kid from doing it, and if the mother also didn't know then that sucks for the kid, but by no means does that mean he should get his points back.

*sigh* If a mentally retarded person does something wrong, I expect them to get some form of punishment. If a normal person does something wrong, I expect them to get some form of punishment. Obviously, there would be differing circumstances in some cases (what pleading insanity is for, afterall). However, no one should be allowed to do something wrong and get off scott free.

But hey, it's good to see the mother's desperate attempt for sympathy has worked on you. Any young kid would probably look at this and say "Well I don't understand what I did was cheating", but just because the kid is austistic you feel he should be given a free ride.

Hell take it even further, you punish a little kid for anything and chances are they're going to have no idea what they did was wrong (until you punish them for it enough times, they get the picture).

My entire point was about agency. Ignorance of the law, and the incapability to understand the law are two different things. Do we punish a train for crashing and killing people? No, because it's a frigging train. If the autistic kid is capable of understanding the situation and just hasn't learned to, then yes, punishing him actually accomplishes something. But if he just isn't going to understand anyway, then there's no real point other than upholding some grand abstracted idea of 'Justice' or personal vengeance.

Why? Why do people cling to these ideas of objective morality? It's all just a construct. There's just no need to have stringent un-bendable codes. Each situation is different, the more adaptable the system the better off it is. Now I don't know if you have this in Australia, but in America we have a thing called 'jury nullification'. This happens when the entire jury finds the law to be lacking in the particular situation, they vote the defendant innocent, even though he or she is guilty under the law. To clarify, this isn't a term that just describes what sometimes happens in spite of the law, IT IS PART OF THE LAW. The law is bendable because it does not arise out of some sort of eternal metaphysical code of right and wrong, but out of the needs of society.

But you don't seem to understand that I'm making a more general point. In this situation, the mother did cheat, and the kid may very well know what he did was wrong, in which case he should have been punished because it means that he won't do it next time. But that being said, I feel more sympathy for the kid because of his situation. Really the mother is the one who is really morally culpable, and she's the one who will know better for next time.

One final thing. People with disabilities should get special treatment. The special treatment should just be proportional to the disability. You wouldn't say a paraplegic is a bad person for not pulling someone out of a burning car would you? They can't. A person with Tourette's should be excused for shouting obscenities. Etc. Etc. If the autistic person doesn't understand what they're doing, they should be excused as well. Notice I am saying "doesn't understand what they're doing" which is different from simply being ignorant of the law.

First and foremost how is MS supposed to keep track of millions of people with all their disabilities? Or let everyone else know that we are supposed to treat them proportionally because of it? Would it be better if on his gamertag "excuse my achievements being out of order because I have autism." This is of course after we all are subjected to a battery of psychological exams before we are allowed to sign up to Live in the first place. Since you can't have people claiming they have a disability to get this special treatment in the first place. Or maybe MS could add a new type of gamer. Right now there is stuff like underground and family and such. Why not make a new server and call it something like Special? Then we can keep them away from the "normal" players and they can do whatever they want. Lets just take away one of the last places where people with mental disabilities are treated equally and fairly. Where they aren't subjected to being put in the special class and being told how different they are. I mean that is the only fair way to make sure they are protected from the "normals". And the "normals" are protected from them. Afterall that is why we have Special Olympics and Special classes. They can't keep up with the "normals" and the "normals" shouldn't have to slow down for them. So lets just keep them seperated all together.

I don't know about you but to me that sounds quite offensive. And by far worse than having you achievements taken away and getting smacked with a label of exactly what you are. A cheater regardless if you know better or not.

I'm sorry that facts offend you. They have the special Olympics because paraplegics in wheelchairs can't keep up with world-class sprinters. Life isn't fair, some people are better at some things than others. You don't need to build in a special system for autistic people, the company can basically do whatever it wants, if some mother complains that her child was unaware of what he was doing (imagine a scenario in which the mother didn't know, and the kid doesn't understand what cheating is), then they could give them special treatment. If the child is affected that much by it, the mother can send in letters to the company with proof, (i.e. a letter from her child's psychologist that says he's incapable of understanding what cheating is). I guess you also think that blind people shouldn't be allowed to bring their seeing eye dogs into restaurants that generally ban animals. That's a special case right? They should be treated as equals and be allowed to stumble around and spill hot coffee on themselves right? Do we really need to feed ourselves this lie that everyone is equal in spite of the facts?

You have misunderstood. You obviously missed the line "Lets just take away one of the last places where people with mental disabilities are treated equally and fairly. Or maybe I didn't make it clear. Do you think they want to be treated differently? Do you think the, to use your example, parpalegic who can't pull the person out of the car is happy about that fact? That people will ruffle his hair and say it's ok Jimmy we understand you couldn't help because you are special. Do you not think that they would love to be treated like everyone else inspite of their disability if it were physically possible? So there is one place they can and you want to take that away from them? Why because it hurts their feelings? Or because they aren't given an advantage? But instead put on a level playing field where they are just as capable to compete with anyone else disabled or not.

 

[Anti Nudist Cupcake]

That kid can ***** and moan as much as he likes, I have no sympathy for him and as I said in the previous news article, I never had any sympathy because I don't care for achievements.

 

[Lord_Nemesis]

I'm reading all these comments. All the opinions and all I can say for myself: WTF?

He gets a new gamertag? Why? Because he had a mental disibility? Because he is sorry? Fuck that shit, how is that fair?

 

[Belgariontheking1]

I honestly feel bad about the fact that this matters at all. I mean come on its only achievements and a stupid armor for halo. I mean this made media headlines about things that have absolutely no baring in the world at large. I would be find if he was labeled a cheater for actually cheating in online play by hacking the game and playing online in godmode or something like that but achievements? really?

 

[esperandote]

Damn, I hoped MS would be wrong about it.

 

[Twinmill5000]

^ Nice avatar.

Anyway.

Last time, I made a comment stating "Fuck You Microsoft." I still stand by it, albeit for different reasons. Mainly the fact that I can't install Windows 7 on any other PC in my house because of the license agreement on it.

 

[geldonyetich]

Speaking as somebody who loathes people who cheat in games with homicidal intensity, it's quite satisfying to see a guy's mom make a national spectacle of herself because he cheated and didn't own up right away.

Autism is no excuse for heresy.

 

[ReiverCorrupter]

Snip snip-

Check the law: ignorance of it is no excuse for breaking it. Assuming the kid didn't know what he was doing was wrong (which, as I should point out, has nothing to do with the fact the kid is austistic; any young kid probably wouldn't know what cheating is...), the mature thing to do would've been to say "Well I didn't know that was cheating but I do for next time".

Now assuming the kid was incapable of understanding what he did was cheating, it would be up to the mother to make that call for him. The article quite clearly stated the mother warned her kid against what he was doing, so your argument really holds no water.

Don't get me wrong, there are some rules I don't agree with. For example, I believe it is disgusting down here in Australia gays are not allowed to get married. However, I fully believe that breaking the law is grounds for just punishment for doing so.

I'm so tired of people like you trying to put people with disabilities on some kind of pedastal. I've seen plenty of cases where people, without any form of disability, have done something with their Xbox they weren't aware was considered cheating. Why should this austistic kid get his points back over those other people?

You cannot have one set of rules for one person, and another set of rules for everyone else. As I've said before, the fact this kid was autistic has less than nothing to do with this case; any young kid probably wouldn't understand what this kid did would be considered as cheating. It would be up to the mother to prevent her kid from doing it, and if the mother also didn't know then that sucks for the kid, but by no means does that mean he should get his points back.

*sigh* If a mentally retarded person does something wrong, I expect them to get some form of punishment. If a normal person does something wrong, I expect them to get some form of punishment. Obviously, there would be differing circumstances in some cases (what pleading insanity is for, afterall). However, no one should be allowed to do something wrong and get off scott free.

But hey, it's good to see the mother's desperate attempt for sympathy has worked on you. Any young kid would probably look at this and say "Well I don't understand what I did was cheating", but just because the kid is austistic you feel he should be given a free ride.

Hell take it even further, you punish a little kid for anything and chances are they're going to have no idea what they did was wrong (until you punish them for it enough times, they get the picture).

My entire point was about agency. Ignorance of the law, and the incapability to understand the law are two different things. Do we punish a train for crashing and killing people? No, because it's a frigging train. If the autistic kid is capable of understanding the situation and just hasn't learned to, then yes, punishing him actually accomplishes something. But if he just isn't going to understand anyway, then there's no real point other than upholding some grand abstracted idea of 'Justice' or personal vengeance.

Why? Why do people cling to these ideas of objective morality? It's all just a construct. There's just no need to have stringent un-bendable codes. Each situation is different, the more adaptable the system the better off it is. Now I don't know if you have this in Australia, but in America we have a thing called 'jury nullification'. This happens when the entire jury finds the law to be lacking in the particular situation, they vote the defendant innocent, even though he or she is guilty under the law. To clarify, this isn't a term that just describes what sometimes happens in spite of the law, IT IS PART OF THE LAW. The law is bendable because it does not arise out of some sort of eternal metaphysical code of right and wrong, but out of the needs of society.

But you don't seem to understand that I'm making a more general point. In this situation, the mother did cheat, and the kid may very well know what he did was wrong, in which case he should have been punished because it means that he won't do it next time. But that being said, I feel more sympathy for the kid because of his situation. Really the mother is the one who is really morally culpable, and she's the one who will know better for next time.

One final thing. People with disabilities should get special treatment. The special treatment should just be proportional to the disability. You wouldn't say a paraplegic is a bad person for not pulling someone out of a burning car would you? They can't. A person with Tourette's should be excused for shouting obscenities. Etc. Etc. If the autistic person doesn't understand what they're doing, they should be excused as well. Notice I am saying "doesn't understand what they're doing" which is different from simply being ignorant of the law.

First and foremost how is MS supposed to keep track of millions of people with all their disabilities? Or let everyone else know that we are supposed to treat them proportionally because of it? Would it be better if on his gamertag "excuse my achievements being out of order because I have autism." This is of course after we all are subjected to a battery of psychological exams before we are allowed to sign up to Live in the first place. Since you can't have people claiming they have a disability to get this special treatment in the first place. Or maybe MS could add a new type of gamer. Right now there is stuff like underground and family and such. Why not make a new server and call it something like Special? Then we can keep them away from the "normal" players and they can do whatever they want. Lets just take away one of the last places where people with mental disabilities are treated equally and fairly. Where they aren't subjected to being put in the special class and being told how different they are. I mean that is the only fair way to make sure they are protected from the "normals". And the "normals" are protected from them. Afterall that is why we have Special Olympics and Special classes. They can't keep up with the "normals" and the "normals" shouldn't have to slow down for them. So lets just keep them seperated all together.

I don't know about you but to me that sounds quite offensive. And by far worse than having you achievements taken away and getting smacked with a label of exactly what you are. A cheater regardless if you know better or not.

I'm sorry that facts offend you. They have the special Olympics because paraplegics in wheelchairs can't keep up with world-class sprinters. Life isn't fair, some people are better at some things than others. You don't need to build in a special system for autistic people, the company can basically do whatever it wants, if some mother complains that her child was unaware of what he was doing (imagine a scenario in which the mother didn't know, and the kid doesn't understand what cheating is), then they could give them special treatment. If the child is affected that much by it, the mother can send in letters to the company with proof, (i.e. a letter from her child's psychologist that says he's incapable of understanding what cheating is). I guess you also think that blind people shouldn't be allowed to bring their seeing eye dogs into restaurants that generally ban animals. That's a special case right? They should be treated as equals and be allowed to stumble around and spill hot coffee on themselves right? Do we really need to feed ourselves this lie that everyone is equal in spite of the facts?

You have misunderstood. You obviously missed the line "Lets just take away one of the last places where people with mental disabilities are treated equally and fairly. Or maybe I didn't make it clear. Do you think they want to be treated differently? Do you think the, to use your example, parpalegic who can't pull the person out of the car is happy about that fact? That people will ruffle his hair and say it's ok Jimmy we understand you couldn't help because you are special. Do you not think that they would love to be treated like everyone else inspite of their disability if it were physically possible? So there is one place they can and you want to take that away from them? Why because it hurts their feelings? Or because they aren't given an advantage? But instead put on a level playing field where they are just as capable to compete with anyone else disabled or not.

No. I think you're the one who misunderstands. I never said anything about people being forced into different gamerzones or anything like that. My one example is a person who is incapable of understanding what cheating is, what are the chances that person is going to have complex attitudes about fairness or equality? You're confusing fairness with blind adherence to codes without taking the situation at hand into account. This would be a person who just plays a game, and then has their achievements taken away and doesn't understand why. This is perhaps not the kid in the article, but there are people like that out there. Plus, I was only advocating that people with disabilities be given positive benefits. In fact, I think it is unfair that we should disregard extenuating circumstances. If your point is that it is unfair that there are disabled people then you need to take that up with god or mother nature. Society doesn't decide whether they are equal in their abilities, there is just a fact of the matter.

Your solution seems to be that we don't have a special Olympics at all, because we don't want people with disabilities to think that they're different. They might not like being different, but they are. If Jimmy the paraplegic is upset because people don't expect him to perform physical feats he is incapable of, then he's really upset about his condition, not about people. If you take that same person and then accuse him of being a coward for not helping, the FIRST thing he is going to do is point out that he was incapable of helping. If you think we should pit people in wheelchairs against world class sprinters, I can tell you right now that it isn't going to help their self esteem in the slightest when they get lapped.

I don't think the answer is to delude them about their lives, I think it is to try to accommodate them so that their lives are as fulfilling as possible. A person in a wheelchair needs to recognize and come to terms with his or her condition, and society needs to do its part to make sure that their disadvantages are compensated for. I don't know where you got the idea that I was suggesting that autistic people be given their own gamerzones or leagues in videogames. The reason why videogames are one of the last bastions for the disabled to be treated equally is BECAUSE THEY ARE EQUAL WHEN IT COMES TO VIDEOGAMES. Aside from people who have a disability that affects their motor function, most people can play videogames. No one needs help unless they actually need or want help. No one forces people to use wheelchairs, they could crawl if they really wanted to. It's just that no one in their right mind wants to. There's no reason to compensate for most people in videogames because they don't need compensation. Even the example I am talking about isn't at all a reference to the autistic child's ability to play, just their ability to understand what cheating is. It's a point about cheating and punishment, not about who should be allowed to play videogames. One could argue that it is unfair to other people because when they are put into that position, they will be punished, but this is clearly mistaken because the scenario wouldn't be the same unless they also had the same extenuating mental condition.

I was talking about one extreme and abstract case where the agent can't be held fully responsible for his or her actions. I didn't even say that he should be able to keep the achievements he or she cheated for, I just think that the situation would require a more nuanced reaction because of the special circumstances. I made no such claims that autistic people should have their own league. That's all you bro. Have you ever heard of a straw-man fallacy?

 

[Ayrees]

The bottom line is that someone cheated and then covered it up, complaining that they were falsely accused because of a mental illness. I've worked with autistic men and women all of my life, with each one of them being as different as night and day. Some can be higher functioning or nearly bed-ridden. This is entirely a case of someone, knowing the difference between right and wrong and doing so anyway.

Where the problem lies is where the parenting failed. Instead of the mother actually standing up and saying "You get what you pay for." she felt obligated to protect her son. She's not the only one that would ever do that... I see it almost daily. They are different, they have disabilities, or are special.

All parties did exactly what they should have. Stepto did specifically what his job is supposed to do, and it would have been a completely different situation if the child's Gamertag was taken, and not freely given. Yet where the problem lies is solely in the Mother, who didn't do her job as a mother. it's that simple. All this argument over The Special Olympics or compensation for 'special needs' gamers is a completely different argument entirely (though an interesting debate in and of itself).

The kid screwed up, the mother antagonized the situation, and done messed up. Game over.

 

[trophykiller]

Who cares, its just armor. If it were, say, infinite health or something like that, then I could understand the fuss, but it's just a set of armor. I actually saw a guy wth recon armor, and you know what I did? Shot him in the face, like any other player in free for all.

 

[MGlBlaze]

I have an Autistic Spectrum Disorder and the mother now fills me with disgust. It is true that Autistic people often require assistance with some things, but she was using her son's Disability to gain undue sympathy for both him and herself.

What's worse, she was aware of what happened from the very start and now that the cat is out of the bag, she is still trying to paint them positively.

Parasite.

Also, the kid shouldn't get the one-month free membership and a new gamertag.

It was just a very decent and civil PR move on MS's behalf. Also decent in the fact that MS has no need for the family to be reeling from this chain of events - it's just a gaming community, the child hasn't committed anything viciously heinous - just something stupid and dishonest - they paid the price and got a bad reputation already, there is no doubt the kid and the mother will suffer publicly depending on how well-known this case has become; if not, they should count themselves lucky, lick their wounds and do well to never repeat it.

Last thing MS needs is people raising pitchforks and torches on a witchhunt on their behalf over something that can be so easily rectified with a gesture of kindness and reconciliation. More power to MS either way and capitalising on stupid peoples mistakes - bravo MS really.

Perhaps, but I disagree that they diserve any gesture of kindness after all this. I do however agree that the 'raising pitchforks and torches on a witchhunt' shouldn't happen either.

Perhaps the best thing would be to simply stop things here and allow those two to go lick their wounds, as you put it. That's how I see it, at least.

 

[RaikuFA]

i thinks its stupid when people have their race, religion or disability and then abuse it

 

[ElTigreSantiago]

Hell yeah! I knew this was the case as soon as I saw that thread. I'm loving Microsoft right now. I just wish they didn't give them the free stuff.

 

[squid5580]

Snip snip-

Check the law: ignorance of it is no excuse for breaking it. Assuming the kid didn't know what he was doing was wrong (which, as I should point out, has nothing to do with the fact the kid is austistic; any young kid probably wouldn't know what cheating is...), the mature thing to do would've been to say "Well I didn't know that was cheating but I do for next time".

Now assuming the kid was incapable of understanding what he did was cheating, it would be up to the mother to make that call for him. The article quite clearly stated the mother warned her kid against what he was doing, so your argument really holds no water.

Don't get me wrong, there are some rules I don't agree with. For example, I believe it is disgusting down here in Australia gays are not allowed to get married. However, I fully believe that breaking the law is grounds for just punishment for doing so.

I'm so tired of people like you trying to put people with disabilities on some kind of pedastal. I've seen plenty of cases where people, without any form of disability, have done something with their Xbox they weren't aware was considered cheating. Why should this austistic kid get his points back over those other people?

You cannot have one set of rules for one person, and another set of rules for everyone else. As I've said before, the fact this kid was autistic has less than nothing to do with this case; any young kid probably wouldn't understand what this kid did would be considered as cheating. It would be up to the mother to prevent her kid from doing it, and if the mother also didn't know then that sucks for the kid, but by no means does that mean he should get his points back.

*sigh* If a mentally retarded person does something wrong, I expect them to get some form of punishment. If a normal person does something wrong, I expect them to get some form of punishment. Obviously, there would be differing circumstances in some cases (what pleading insanity is for, afterall). However, no one should be allowed to do something wrong and get off scott free.

But hey, it's good to see the mother's desperate attempt for sympathy has worked on you. Any young kid would probably look at this and say "Well I don't understand what I did was cheating", but just because the kid is austistic you feel he should be given a free ride.

Hell take it even further, you punish a little kid for anything and chances are they're going to have no idea what they did was wrong (until you punish them for it enough times, they get the picture).

My entire point was about agency. Ignorance of the law, and the incapability to understand the law are two different things. Do we punish a train for crashing and killing people? No, because it's a frigging train. If the autistic kid is capable of understanding the situation and just hasn't learned to, then yes, punishing him actually accomplishes something. But if he just isn't going to understand anyway, then there's no real point other than upholding some grand abstracted idea of 'Justice' or personal vengeance.

Why? Why do people cling to these ideas of objective morality? It's all just a construct. There's just no need to have stringent un-bendable codes. Each situation is different, the more adaptable the system the better off it is. Now I don't know if you have this in Australia, but in America we have a thing called 'jury nullification'. This happens when the entire jury finds the law to be lacking in the particular situation, they vote the defendant innocent, even though he or she is guilty under the law. To clarify, this isn't a term that just describes what sometimes happens in spite of the law, IT IS PART OF THE LAW. The law is bendable because it does not arise out of some sort of eternal metaphysical code of right and wrong, but out of the needs of society.

But you don't seem to understand that I'm making a more general point. In this situation, the mother did cheat, and the kid may very well know what he did was wrong, in which case he should have been punished because it means that he won't do it next time. But that being said, I feel more sympathy for the kid because of his situation. Really the mother is the one who is really morally culpable, and she's the one who will know better for next time.

One final thing. People with disabilities should get special treatment. The special treatment should just be proportional to the disability. You wouldn't say a paraplegic is a bad person for not pulling someone out of a burning car would you? They can't. A person with Tourette's should be excused for shouting obscenities. Etc. Etc. If the autistic person doesn't understand what they're doing, they should be excused as well. Notice I am saying "doesn't understand what they're doing" which is different from simply being ignorant of the law.

First and foremost how is MS supposed to keep track of millions of people with all their disabilities? Or let everyone else know that we are supposed to treat them proportionally because of it? Would it be better if on his gamertag "excuse my achievements being out of order because I have autism." This is of course after we all are subjected to a battery of psychological exams before we are allowed to sign up to Live in the first place. Since you can't have people claiming they have a disability to get this special treatment in the first place. Or maybe MS could add a new type of gamer. Right now there is stuff like underground and family and such. Why not make a new server and call it something like Special? Then we can keep them away from the "normal" players and they can do whatever they want. Lets just take away one of the last places where people with mental disabilities are treated equally and fairly. Where they aren't subjected to being put in the special class and being told how different they are. I mean that is the only fair way to make sure they are protected from the "normals". And the "normals" are protected from them. Afterall that is why we have Special Olympics and Special classes. They can't keep up with the "normals" and the "normals" shouldn't have to slow down for them. So lets just keep them seperated all together.

I don't know about you but to me that sounds quite offensive. And by far worse than having you achievements taken away and getting smacked with a label of exactly what you are. A cheater regardless if you know better or not.

I'm sorry that facts offend you. They have the special Olympics because paraplegics in wheelchairs can't keep up with world-class sprinters. Life isn't fair, some people are better at some things than others. You don't need to build in a special system for autistic people, the company can basically do whatever it wants, if some mother complains that her child was unaware of what he was doing (imagine a scenario in which the mother didn't know, and the kid doesn't understand what cheating is), then they could give them special treatment. If the child is affected that much by it, the mother can send in letters to the company with proof, (i.e. a letter from her child's psychologist that says he's incapable of understanding what cheating is). I guess you also think that blind people shouldn't be allowed to bring their seeing eye dogs into restaurants that generally ban animals. That's a special case right? They should be treated as equals and be allowed to stumble around and spill hot coffee on themselves right? Do we really need to feed ourselves this lie that everyone is equal in spite of the facts?

You have misunderstood. You obviously missed the line "Lets just take away one of the last places where people with mental disabilities are treated equally and fairly. Or maybe I didn't make it clear. Do you think they want to be treated differently? Do you think the, to use your example, parpalegic who can't pull the person out of the car is happy about that fact? That people will ruffle his hair and say it's ok Jimmy we understand you couldn't help because you are special. Do you not think that they would love to be treated like everyone else inspite of their disability if it were physically possible? So there is one place they can and you want to take that away from them? Why because it hurts their feelings? Or because they aren't given an advantage? But instead put on a level playing field where they are just as capable to compete with anyone else disabled or not.

No. I think you're the one who misunderstands. I never said anything about people being forced into different gamerzones or anything like that. My one example is a person who is incapable of understanding what cheating is, what are the chances that person is going to have complex attitudes about fairness or equality? You're confusing fairness with blind adherence to codes without taking the situation at hand into account. This would be a person who just plays a game, and then has their achievements taken away and doesn't understand why. This is perhaps not the kid in the article, but there are people like that out there. Plus, I was only advocating that people with disabilities be given positive benefits. In fact, I think it is unfair that we should disregard extenuating circumstances. If your point is that it is unfair that there are disabled people then you need to take that up with god or mother nature. Society doesn't decide whether they are equal in their abilities, there is just a fact of the matter.

Your solution seems to be that we don't have a special Olympics at all, because we don't want people with disabilities to think that they're different. They might not like being different, but they are. If Jimmy the paraplegic is upset because people don't expect him to perform physical feats he is incapable of, then he's really upset about his condition, not about people. If you take that same person and then accuse him of being a coward for not helping, the FIRST thing he is going to do is point out that he was incapable of helping. If you think we should pit people in wheelchairs against world class sprinters, I can tell you right now that it isn't going to help their self esteem in the slightest when they get lapped.

I don't think the answer is to delude them about their lives, I think it is to try to accommodate them so that their lives are as fulfilling as possible. A person in a wheelchair needs to recognize and come to terms with his or her condition, and society needs to do its part to make sure that their disadvantages are compensated for. I don't know where you got the idea that I was suggesting that autistic people be given their own gamerzones or leagues in videogames. The reason why videogames are one of the last bastions for the disabled to be treated equally is BECAUSE THEY ARE EQUAL WHEN IT COMES TO VIDEOGAMES. Aside from people who have a disability that affects their motor function, most people can play videogames. No one needs help unless they actually need or want help. No one forces people to use wheelchairs, they could crawl if they really wanted to. It's just that no one in their right mind wants to. There's no reason to compensate for most people in videogames because they don't need compensation. Even the example I am talking about isn't at all a reference to the autistic child's ability to play, just their ability to understand what cheating is. It's a point about cheating and punishment, not about who should be allowed to play videogames. One could argue that it is unfair to other people because when they are put into that position, they will be punished, but this is clearly mistaken because the scenario wouldn't be the same unless they also had the same extenuating mental condition.

I was talking about one extreme and abstract case where the agent can't be held fully responsible for his or her actions. I didn't even say that he should be able to keep the achievements he or she cheated for, I just think that the situation would require a more nuanced reaction because of the special circumstances. I made no such claims that autistic people should have their own league. That's all you bro. Have you ever heard of a straw-man fallacy?

First if they are playing the games and getting the rewards there isn't a problem. Second read my post again. but this time really read it. Try and see if you can find the tone. I suggested the "special" not because it is a good idea because it isn't. But because that is the only way it would work to keep things fair for everybody. Oh right I forgot you are against people being treated fairly. Which leads us down a very slippery slope.