Talk:Shawn Woolley
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on October 9, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Just want to point out: the article says that at the end he was playing "upwards of 12 hours a day". As a former EQ player, I can attest that most of the most hardcore players (and it sounds as if he was one) at that time thought nothing of playing it for 30+ hour stretches punctuated by a few hours sleep.
the 'vision and perception' portion of this article is confusing, possibly unrelated, and probably self-promotion. i don't think it belongs. --hamstar 20:27, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Agreed. Ppe42 01:51, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
I have removed the VisionAndPsychosis information, and preserve it here for prosperity. The psychologists among us can evaluate the information for their own amusement. Ppe42 05:48, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
"The Everquest Connection page at VisionAndPsychosis.Net explains the simple psychology of what happened to Woolley to cause the suicide. The phenomenon of physiology is explained in first semester psychology, Physiology of Sight, Subliminal Sight, and Peripheral Vision Reflexes. It argues that Woolley actually had a dissociative mental break caused by this known conflict of physiology related to the Vision Startle Reflex. In an email Elizabeth Woolley stated that she cannot remember how his computer was set up in the room but another email from Ben Stein confirms that Tommy Stein, also featured in the 48 Hours Episode, had a large fish in the tank beside his computer. As strange as it sounds movement in Subliminal Peripheral Vision while concentrating engages the phenomenon.
The Demonstration Page allows you to experience the fading to extinction of stimulus in Subliminal Peripheral Vision.
While being amused you should find someone who lived through the period and and experienced this as lecture material in psychology.
I don 't know why it is not included in lectures today.
Emails to emeritus professors in psychology reveal that they have never encountered the material. It is a normal feature of basic physiology.
Most Ph.D's I have exchanged emails with will comment that in "their opinion" exposure to Subliminal Distraction is not possible. They claim that the victim must have a previous mental condition to have the expected mental break. Cubicles are not placed in business offices to protect the occasional mental patient that might use them. They are there because of an accidental discovery of a conflict of physiology related to the vision startle reflex.
These "experts" are accustomed to discussing psychology as if they were arguing how many Angels could dance on the head of a pin. That was the illustration Charles Dickens used to express his disgust of arrogance. A simple phone call to a designer would explain this to you.
There are incidents such as the Belgian Polar Expedition and Jumping Frenchmen of Maine that point to operant conditioning as the source of psychiatric symptoms.
L K Tucker
Hello L K Tucker,
Let's have a look at your theory. People have peripheral vision - well, sure. Things in the corner of your eyes might be distracting - of course. Ofice cubicles are designed to prevent distractions - well duh. But when you say that things in peripheral vision cause psychosis, dissociative fugue or a "dissociative mental break", that is when you start getting into an area called original research.
When your studies or evidence have been published in a peer-reviewed journal, it will stop being original research and becomes (potentially) encyclopedic. However, observe that a Google search on "Peripheral Vision Reflexes" brings up a page of results of blogs and forums where you are blatantly advertising your very own website, VisionAndPsychosis.Net.
It seems that you have developed this crank theory based on a badly remembered mentioning of distractions in cubicle design during a lecture fifty years ago, and now wish to pin your crank theory to every and any cause of sudden psychiatric illness. I am not 'arrogant', but I am a firmly skeptical scientist and I believe that the burden of proof lies on you to prove your theory has merit.
Please refrain from placing references to your website on Wikipedia in future. Refraining from your blog and forum spamming activities would also be desirable.
Now if you will excuse me if I off to remove your pseudoscientific original research theory from the Computer desk article.
Ppe42 04:05, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Does anyone know what the two N64 games involving lawsuits are? Does anyone have a source for this? I would like to know what they are if someone knows. If these lawsuits cannot be verified, can I delete it?
-Z
Why on earth is this on Wikipedia?
Why on earth is anything on Wikipedia? Oh, because it's an encyclopedia.
[edit] N64 Suit
“In 2001, a Louisiana woman named Esther Walker sued Nintendo of America under the claim that the N64 killed her 30-year-old son, Benjamin.” Quoted from,,, History of Videogame Lawsuits from 1UP.com
The remainder of the quoted material runs about two paragraphs.
www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=2&cId=3146206
The original court papers were posted on the Internet within the last five years.
I don't have time to go back and repeat the material on my site for those who won't do basic verification before complaining.
The material, which forms the basis of my site, comes from first semester psychology psychophysics.
One of the reasons Wikipedia has such a poor reputation is this type character assassination.
Please do your own work accurately. There is nothing called a "cubicle desk."
LK Tucker 69.1.46.40 (talk) 10:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] "iluveyou"
"...suggesting to his mother that he might have been rejected by a girl online, in the game, something which furthered his depression."
Please cite this or change this. Without a citation, the name of his 'last' character could be taken multiple ways - I interpret it as the son telling the mother that he loves her, because she'll be the first one to see the character's name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.145.160.65 (talk) 21:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
