All this is just arguing over definitions. No one disagrees (well, much) on what's going on. It's just a "semantic stopsign" to short circuit a proper evaluatio

All this is just arguing over definitions. No one disagrees (well, much) on what's going on. It's just a "semantic stopsign" to short circuit a proper evaluation. If you can make the case it's an addiction, hey, you've proved it's bad to some extent, mission accomplished. For magazines and many people, that's enough analysis. And the author didn't seem to ever explain how a kid that refuses to get off Minecraft and fights with his family isn't a problem. Unless the point was "don't tell him to stop". While I generally appreciate the sentiment, maybe the kid has other things he's neglecting... Same argument for drugs. People resist the term addict when talking about SSRIs, but that's probably because they never run out. And likewise, since everyone agrees that opiates are addictive, they must be bad. The thought that you can be an illegal opiate addict yet reap huge benefits from it is a contradiction to many people. (Unless a doctor is involved -- then it's OK.) It's just intellectual laziness. Btw, MUDs were awesome, and I had my first real relationship by meeting someone via a MUD. It contributed to me dropping out of school, but getting more info software was far more useful.