To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.loc.us.ma.bosOpen lugnet.loc.us.ma.bos in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Local / United States / Massachusetts / Boston / 459
458  |  460
Subject: 
Minors in LUGs (Re: NELUG Turns 50!!)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.loc.us.me, lugnet.org.us, lugnet.loc.us.ma.bos
Date: 
Wed, 17 Nov 1999 14:08:28 GMT
Viewed: 
3 times
  
In lugnet.loc.us.me, Ryan Dennett writes:

I'll start off my saying that everything was very well said, Dave.
Although
I am still 2 1/3 years away from being considered an AFOL, I can see
why you wanted to set up AFOL group, partly because of circumstances
that I have mentioned previously. That is why I also suggested that if you
(NELUG) decide to allow some JrFOLs to become members, that you
only accept those who show maturity and understanding about the whole
reason behind this group, and most of those people are going to be over
13 years of age(I'm not saying that you can't have a muture 11yo or an
immature 17yo, just that in most cases that is what it's going to be)

The problem is this:  While it's easy to say "only mature people above a
certain age", in practice this becomes unworkable.  Why?  It requires looking
the kid, or worse yet, their parent/guardian in the eye and saying "you aren't
welcome here".  That's a rough spot to be in.  And what happens if the person's
behavior degrades?  At what point do you draw the line?

My vote, if we're taking one, is to leave things as they are- 18 being the age
at which people can join.  I know it sucks to be below that age and be mature
enough to handle hanging with a bunch of adults- I was there once myself- but
it just seems to be the best solution.  It takes care of the really, really BIG
issue- legality- and makes a bunch of smaller ones less likely to come up.

I'm not saying that I think that NELUG shouldn't hold events for kids,
publicised in advance as such and kid-friendly, etc.  But I don't think that
<18 folks should be "members", at general meetings, etc.

eric



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Minors in LUGs (Re: NELUG Turns 50!!)
 
(...) person's (...) BIG (...) Eric, I don't want this to sound like arguing, because that's not what I want it to be, but what happens if you get, say, a 18 or 19yo who acts up and isn't on the maturity level that the group would like. How is it (...) (25 years ago, 17-Nov-99, to lugnet.loc.us.me, lugnet.org.us, lugnet.loc.us.ma.bos)
  Re: Minors in LUGs (Re: NELUG Turns 50!!)
 
<snip> (...) Eric J, I agree with everything you have said here. I really want to keep this from having to be a "judgement call" of any kind. I also agree that to have <18 folks at the types of meetings we have had so far is probably not in the best (...) (25 years ago, 17-Nov-99, to lugnet.loc.us.me, lugnet.org.us, lugnet.loc.us.ma.bos)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: NELUG Turns 50!!
 
(...) see (...) purpose of (...) I'll start off my saying that everything was very well said, Dave. Although I am still 2 1/3 years away from being considered an AFOL, I can see why you wanted to set up AFOL group, partly because of circumstances (...) (25 years ago, 16-Nov-99, to lugnet.loc.us.me, lugnet.org.us, lugnet.loc.us.ma.bos)

35 Messages in This Thread:











Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR