|
|
 | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) Fine. Now we know your position on the subject. Some, however, may want to take a different position WRT to parents who are deciding whether to allow their kids to use LUGNET. (...) As I have said before: clarity. You have stated your view. I, (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) Or to get married. Or for consent. Or, often, to be tried and punished as an adult. And lets not forget that most kids are officially taught sex-ed as early as jr. high, so that puts them in their early teens. Of course, "gay" gets thrown (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) Firstly, yes, that would more-or-less work for existing usership, but new users would be free to lie all they want. Second, everything I've seen says that making a pointedly "adults only" section is just going to make the situation worse, as (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) Neither does it obligate him. Parents need to start taking paying attention to what their kids are viewing online, and every attempt to make the internet kid-safe only reinforces their false beliefs that there is nothing that their kids can (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) It's kind of funny, but I think that kid-friendly is an awful term for the suggestion that John is propsing. Kid-hostile is closer, but a single term for kid-we-don't-trust-y...-take-part would be better. I don't know, but if my kids found a (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
|
