@BattleChicken

I definitely share your concerns there. There's a fine line between a strong leader who defends his people, and a strong leader who defends his people AND rules them with an iron fist.

I don't think so, Daniel, considering the fact that Hal outright said he's not going to replace Doug. Also, how many times can you put "Doug Lowenstein", "Jack Thompson", "crap", and "fighting back" in a paragraph? I swear, it looks like a freaking Mad Lib.

Anyways, all jokesaside, while I share most everyone's opinion that the next ESA president should be a bit more on the proactive side (who would say no to a cross-country tour, reminding state legislators how much support, not to mention money, they'd lose supporting a dead-end anti-VG bill?) it wouldn't take much for someone in that position to go to the dark side, and like battlechicken mentioned, it'd be the "Your Mom"/Kotaku debacle all over again, but on a grander scale.

It's hard to say. Playing defensively has worked for the ESA so far, but all it takes is one nutcase judge giving the thumbs-up to a law for the whole thing to fall apart. And going too aggresively would put them in the same light as the previously-mentioned RIAA, and the MPAA. Whoever the new prez is, he's got a bit of a tightrope to walk here. He's probably not going to please everyone, but as long as he does his damnedest to keep me from being a fugitive from justice because I play GTA every now and again, he'll have my thumbs-up.

[...] Hal Halpin: Rumors swirl around Lowenstein departure [Game Politics] [...]

Wait... when'd Hal get the haircut?

Gamers? President? Bah!

How dare you Mentally Mastrabating Media Murderers attempt to establish yourself as a country.

We're still after you, Farcry developers! And this time....Your L337 h4x will be no use!

-Germanswatguy,Sergeant Major of the Anti Pixelante Attack Squad(A.P.A.S)

From reading related replies regarding the change in management in this and other threads, it seems as though many would have liked a tougher Lowenstein -- someone harder, one who favored the preemptive strike... one with a tattoo of a video game bill with red circle and a line through it on his chest, (I'm certain the circle would be made of dragons, or spiders, or spider-dragons so it would look cooler than it sounds). A Lowenstein ready to fight to the death to defend the rights of gamers everywhere.

Well. I personally would like to say that I will miss the kind and gentle Lowenstein; even with his unprecedented kindness to puppies and fondness for church bake sales. His departure could very well mark the end of the lovable ESA, with it's rainbows and rivers of chocolate... ushering in a dark age... an age of preventative litigation.

The thing that I love most about Lowenstein's ESA is the fact that it defends itself, as opposed to searching for fights. I see a distinct difference between the two, and I find the first admirable, and the second morally reprehensible when referring to an industry group. It is my opinion that if the new head of the ESA decides to 'be more proactive', it is merely a matter of time before the ESA 'proactively' mirrors the RIAA in action and attitude. (A good example is the 'your mom is E for everybody' T-shirt reaction, and the ESA's threatening action on kotaku for posting an article about it)

Being aggressive will just mean there is always another lawsuit to file.. Another fight to pick. When the big threats are gone -- and a day *will* come where the critical battles will have been fought and won -- the icy legal glare of the heartless ESA will fall on you and me.

I personally would rather have the industry tolerate a little misinformation and slander from ignorant pols; only fighting the battles that really matter, than aggressively enforcing it's ideals... as the logical step after all these baseless government lawsuits taper off is an endless string of baseless ESA lawsuits.

Lowenstein wimped out on this one, didn't he?