Hey Lex... This CPT Mitch talks like a good soldier. Some one who defends our country. Someone whom I WANT to defend the USA. You can't have good soldiers that completely refuse to fight because they perceive the war to be not just. CPT Mitch might have been, in the end (whatever end there is) more noble if he refused to serve. But I dount the people who depend on him - his fellow soldiers who he is responsible for - would see it that way. If there were more people like him, there would be less Abu Graibs.

And what if there is a war and no one showed up? That depends. One side usually gets people to show up.

DeLappe says:

“…that is the nature of protest. I am sure the owners of the tea dumped in Boston harbor were annoyed. I am sure the white diners at the lunch counter during the civil rights protests were annoyed. I am sure the soldiers getting daisies placed in their rifle barrels at the Pentagon during the Vietnam war protests were annoyed. While it is easy to say what I am doing just makes people angry or moreso - it is perhaps over time that real change may occur.”

Dude…you are actually comparing pissing off a bunch of FPS gamers (a hand-full at a time) to: the Boston Tea Party…to Civil Rights Protesters…to putting daisies into armed and loaded guns.

“My gesture in the game is a simple, pacifistic action. It makes a point.” I would say a little too simple. I little too pacifistic.

“Hey Lex... This CPT Mitch talks like a good soldier. Some one who defends our country. Someone whom I WANT to defend the USA.” Defend the USA from WHAT, exactly? Please clarify.

"And what if there is a war and no one showed up? That depends. One side usually gets people to show up." In this case, the 'side' which 'showed up' was in Iraq, which is nowhere near the continental United States; they were not poised to invade American soil, they were actually on THEIR soil when WE invaded. You understand this, right?

Maybe you want to sign up with Rambo Company to fight beside CPTMitch when we ‘defend’ our nation against Iran, too? Lots of opportunity for male bonding I hear. You and CPTMitch can stop your fellow soldiers from indulging in more than what would be an ethical amount of shooting.

I am as liberal and anti-war as anyone, but I just don't think DeLappe gets it. I play an MMO (massively multiplayer online game) in my nonexistent free time, and what this guy doesn't get is that gamers are not interested in talking to other players beyond things like "spare monies for noob?" or for organizing themselves in tactical situations. I very, very rarely pay attention to what's going on in the chats except insofar as to make fun of the poor grammar. Something I saw which reminded me of this was a group of conservative Christians setting up a room in my town where the Bible would be read aloud non-stop regardless if there was anyone there to hear it (in addition to being very proudly liberal I am also very proudly Christian). To that my question is, what the heck is the point supposed to be? What does it accomplish? Who does it benefit? Who is it supposed to edify?

DeLappe may get some press from this, but the actual point of what he's trying to do, which is to raise awareness among the people who actually use the game, is null because gamers aren't listening anyway.

His criticisms of the game may be valid but whether or not he sees himself as a media artist, he'd better find a more effective method.

Lex, this is starting to devolve into a flame war…and it shouldn’t.

But you miss the point. CPT Mitch…and most people in the Armed Services…signed up for various reasons, but specifically going to fight in Iraq was not one of them. This guy CPTMitch sounds like he signed up to protect and serve…and to do so with eyes open to the moral reasons and implications of his actions. A good reason to sign up and a good mindset to have, in my opinion. That is why he sounds like a good soldier.

Is your position that no one should ever join the army, thereby “don’t show up” for the war? That’s not a new idea BTW. The Chinese have an old saying (I think its old anyway…not sure); “good iron doesn’t (should not be used to ) make a nail / Good son doesn’t become a soldier”. But I don’t believe in this viewpoint. I believe it is important to have a peacetime standing professional army and I would like that army to have good leadership which appreciates diversity. Is your position that every individual soldier should have the freedom to decide if they are going to fight in any particular war? I don’t think that is very practical or realistic, do you?

And why do you start talking about male bonding and macho this or that? I don’t understand where you are coming from. Not that I see anything wrong with male bonding. I just don’t think my views have anything to do with being a man. The values of service, courage, loyalty, and dedication – values which I hope are values of the US Military – are not sex-specific values. Neither are compassion are understanding sex-specific values. And I would like to see more of these values in the military as well.

"Being both a college journalism student and a veteran of internet first-person shooters, I have no idea why Ms. Clarren felt like writing an article about this.

The guy is protesting the Iraq war by being a spamming newbie with a weird name on an America's Army server?"

If that's genuinely your understanding of a) the content of this story and b) why it is a story worth writing (whether you agree with the activists' tactic or not), I strongly suggest you consider changing majors.