Coward -- I get the feeling you're going somewhere interesting here, but the metaphor isn't quite working. Would you mind spoon feeding what you're getting at here, without putting on any kind of satire/parody of what I said? Are you saying moderation is equivalent to jail time? Freedom of speech equivalent to freedom to move about public space? Freedom of speech "invented" by someone? Too many things going on at once to make your point clearly, at least to me.

Moderation censors opinions contrary to the majority of the participants in a particular forum. This frustrates those who need to communicate critical points, which will produce an entirely new set of negative feelings and may even break the behavioral hooks that make social networking appealing.

Yeah, not bad. Kind of patience-trying, though. Lots of waiting.

...seems to me somebody should address the question that was asked. My personal favorites have NOTHING to do with my answer, though many of you will find that unbelievable. From my experience:

Jenga
Darts
Wii Sports (Wii)
Mario Tennis (N64)
Mario Kart 64

Obviously, that's not an option for this person. What prompts you to type this and click preview, and then click submit, without considering this? Do you think you're the one who's stating an obvious point? You're not. You're the one who is proving he doesn't think before he types.

Wow. This guy proves i kan reed's point IMMEDIATELY.

Almighty Isis, make my phone pay for my potato chips!

Wow. I hadn't noticed that Amazon was marketing the Fire tablets as e-readers, but yeah, that's the wrong hardware for the job. Sounds like a group of marketers at Amazon think that their poop can dance and do tricks.

You're not under the impression the Paperwhite isn't e-ink are you? It is. Paperwhite is e-ink with a sidelight built in.

Canasta is where it's at.

That's not how you spell Hole Foods.

I'm saying that seeking chemical sources to soothe over the overabundance of reward-based interactions we are experiencing will naturally progress towards escalating both the drugs and the reward-based interactions. I apologize if I misused the term "slippery slope". Invoking antidepressants as an example of harmlessness is far more questionable than any incorrect naming of a type of fallacy I may have done.

You don't know? I graduated from the school that passes out pieces of paper that prove I'm more authoritative than you are. Look at my creds, they prove everything! It's way better than thinking about what I'm saying. Now shut up and call me Doctor.

I have to reject that. Slippery slope. If we take enough drugs, we can totally mechanize and work/play on our machines/selves/machineselves all the time, and be "content" about it. Why would that be good, as opposed to changing our expectation of the next generation being the same mental configuration as the previous one?

You misunderstand me. I'm not blaming technology. I'm blaming our lack of understanding of how our interaction with it affects us as a group over time.