 | | Re: Why these news groups were created —Frank Filz
|
| | | (...) And what about someone under 18 who is just coming to grips with their LGBT sexuality who happens to feel like he's finally found a community here at Lugnet that he can trust to talk about it? Do we deny that individual the opportunity to grow (...) (20 years ago, 22-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) And what about a parent who wishes that their children not be exposed to these types of discussions that occur in public groups on LUGNET? (...) Yes, for the same reason that we accommodate people who'd rather those types of topics not be (...) (20 years ago, 22-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —David Laswell
|
| | | | | (...) Parents who use the internet as a babysitter need to get their collective heads out of the clouds and get interested in what their kids are doing. The internet isn't safe, and it never will be without strict governmental control. And you know (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | (...) There have always been bad parents, and there always will be bad parents. But that doesn't release Todd from choosing to make LUGNET completely kid-safe IMO (...) Exactly. Which is why we all need to take the responsibility on ourselves to (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | (...) 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 (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Of course not. All I'm saying is that if he wants LUGNET to be "kid-friendly", steps need to be taken to make it that way because I think it is getting too adult-oriented in certain areas. (...) Exactly. And when they do check out LUGNET and (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | (...) LUGNET is a free, mostly self-regulating community of FOL's, primarily of the A- variety, but with a few T- and K- types thrown in as well. Putting stricter systems in place to restrict and censor the tone of conversation in so-called (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) How do you know this? Are you only considering members or posters? What about all of the people who use LUGNET as an online resource? And BTW, membership on LUGNET is most certainly not "free". (...) That is purely opinion with no basis on (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | (...) The ages I've seen posted by LUGNET users generally range in the 18+ range, but a few have posted ages in the 13-18 group, and a few others have posted in the under-13 group (I can think of at least one person from each of the non-adult age (...) (20 years ago, 25-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Exactly. Hundreds if not thousands are directed to LUGNET via word of mouth (at train shows alone). What would they care about topics not relating to LEGO? (...) Quit? Rescinded their memberships? How do you know that? (...) I said the TOS (...) (20 years ago, 26-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Safety (was: Why these news groups were created) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) Sure it is. I don't know anyone to have been harmed by it. Chris (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —Tim David
|
| | | | | At SIXTEEN a person can be married (in this country anyway (Britain)) You have to have a pretty good idea of sexuality for that (well hopefully anyway!) Tim (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) Yeah, there will always be exceptions WRT to maturity below the age of 18 (and above, for that matter!), but 18 happens to be really convenient because every member stated truthfully that they were 18 or older when they signed up for LUGNET, (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | (...) 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 (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) I think it has always been thusly (that one could lie about their age). (...) I don't follow what you mean. The objectionable content would be masked from underage viewing. JOHN (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | (...) Parents won't always see it that way. Consider how they'd react if LUGNET proudly advertised that it had a gigantic porn library that was only accessible by those who signed up as being 18+. Setting up a section that's only accessible by (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) Parents won't always see anything in any particular way, so I don't follow your logic here. (...) Consider how they'd react if LUGNET proudly advertised that it had a gigantic porn library that was accessible by anyone. I don't understand your (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | (...) Parents could look at it as securing all objectionable content away from their childrens' eyes, or the could look at it as a website that has content that's objectionable enough that kids shouldn't be using it at all. (...) Simply applying the (...) (20 years ago, 25-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) For .admin.nntp: LUGNET has to abide by certain societal restrictions for the sake of liability. In that sense, John's perfectly right. For .o-t.debate: Screw them! Parents withholding what it means to be human by shielding their kids from (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why these news groups were created —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) 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, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| | | | |
