| |
Eric, see my reply to David's message for more of my opinion on
the topic. One thing though, the term "tween"(which I think is
downright, gutwrenchingly sick) refers to those ages 8-12, so I
don't think a 16yo would like being called a "tweener". You must
also remember that just because someone is 16, that they have
their own transportation, becuase I'm 4 months shy of 16 and I
haven't even started Driver's Ed
Ryan
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 11/16/1999, at 3:35 PM, Eric Kingsley wrote:
> Well I am hopeing that this turns into a very constructive discussion on • how we
> can cater to minors in our Local groups. I would be very interested in • seeing
> what people have to say on the issue. I would also like to hear any
> experiances that people have had dealing with minors in organized groups.
>
> Seeing that this is a good discussion for all of the local groups I have • set
> followup's to lugnet.org.us.
>
>
> In lugnet.loc.us.me, David Eaton writes:
> > I'd have to agree for the most part with what's been said-- I'd like to • see
> > NELUG cater to a wider audience... However, this is really where the • purpose
> > of NELUG gets called into question.
>
> I would have to agree that I would like to cater to minors in some form.
> Hopefully this discussion will create ideas on how to do this.
>
> >
> > If we want a bunch of us to get together and talk about Lego (your • standard
> > NELUG meeting so far)-- well, I don't want a bunch of young children • running
> > around. In addition to that, children don't usually have a mode of
> > transportation to get anywhere, and aren't allowed out late at night, • etc.
> > Plus it would probably mean that if anything DID happen (accidental • injuries,
> > etc., someone falls down the stairs at someone's house, whatever), I • DON'T
> > want NELUG to be held responsible. Things like that get tricky when • you're
> > dealing with minors.
>
> I would agree that for our current standard NELUG meetings I would not • want
> children running around. I think that these meetings should remain Adult • only.
>
> Although this also brings up the question of what I consider "tweeners" • those
> young adults that are say between 16 and 18 that might have their own • form of
> transportation and are mature and want to attend. How do we handle that. • Do
> we just say sorry can't help you? I would hope not because these are • probably
> the people that most need a "support group" at the moment. They probably • don't
> have many freinds into LEGO and they probably don't want to hang around • kids 5
> years younger that they are.
>
> So do we have some sort of "permission slip" that clears us of any
> responsibility? Does that mean that we would have to refrain from having
> alcohol at events (we havn't been drinking much at meetings but • hypothetically
> we might want to).
>
> Do we have different classes of meetings?
>
> 1. Adult only
> 2. 16 and up
> 3. all ages
>
> >
> > However, I don't think that's the sole purpose behind NELUG. Another • aspect of
> > NELUG is informational. We have a mailing list (although not highly used • at
> > the moment, now that the Mindfest has died down, etc) that gets sent out
> > informing our members of events in the area, etc, etc. Here, being a • minor
> > doesn't present a real problem. Sending out a newsletter via email (no
> > addresses or phone numbers being given out or anything) is pretty safe, • I'd
> > say. The only possible problem that it might have would be irresponsible • kids
> > using the mailing list for trivial things... but that can be controlled, • I'd
> > say.
>
> I would say that the mailing list could probably be open to all just like
> LUGNET is open to all. For the most part if someone wanted to know about • an
> event all they would have to do would be look on LUGNET anyway.
>
> Irresposible kids are a relatively easy thing to control with a mailing • list.
> You just remove them from it and block their us of it. Of course there • would
> have to be some sort of sliding scale because one infraction is not • necessarily
> grounds for dismissal.
>
> >
> > The other big purpose to NELUG is to help sponsor larger events. We • haven't
> > really done anything YET that's been strictly NELUG, but it's certainly • in our
> > future (I hope). Here's where it can also get tricky. If we do something • like
> > take a trip down to Enfield, it's probably similar to a "regular" • meeting--
> > kids would need transportation, parental approval, and there are still
> > liability issues... However, if we get a huge confrence room for a day • (or
> > something like that) and decide to sponsor a building event, I think I'd • like
> > to welcome kids... it's also something that parents probably wouldn't • mind
> > attending, even, if it's only for a few hours-- and that helps address • the
> > other problems... and to help with liability, etc, we could have an
> > application form for parents/guardians to sign with the appropriate • legal
> > information. Doing that for things like trips to Enfield/Regular • meetings
> > seems like a lot more effort, though-- more trouble than it's worth.
>
> I would agree that as we grow the likely hood of a larger self-sponsored • event
> becomes more and more likely. For public events I think anyone should be
> invited, hence the name public. We may require parental supervision for • minors
> or those under 16 but that is easy. I would agree that anything • requireing
> travel or related to regular meetings is a bit tougher.
>
> Another idea would be that if say a parent wanted to have meetings • between
> their kids and other kids we might be able to help them with getting in • touch
> with each other and maybe having some sort of "NELUG Jr." that is run by • the
> parents of the kids. We could then maybe even have joint NELUG Jr. and • NELUG
> events where both kids and adults can share their ideas.
>
> >
> > Hence, it's tricky. I'd LIKE to have younger audiences be able to use us • in
> > the informational sense, but that even brings up problems. If a 9 year • old
> > gets an email that there's a NELUG meeting, and doesn't understand that • it's
> > going to be us mostly talking about lego, displaying models, etc., • rather than
> > sitting down and building/playing games, etc., and s/he shows up to the
> > meeting-- well.. that's a problem.
>
> It always comes back to the out-of-control 9 year old doesn't it :-). I • think
> this problem can possibly be solved using some of the ideas I have stated
> above. Have clear cut Adult only meetings and invite kids to more public • all
> ages meetings.
>
> >
> > So the solution up until now has been to only have an adult audience, • with the
> > intent to be to cater more to younger audiences when we are a larger • group.
> > Hence it's been a "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it". And now • it
> > looks like we've seen the first signs of that bridge, especially with • all the
> > kids who saw us at the Mindfest, and potentially the ones who are seeing • our
> > display at the Construction Site... But I'm still not sure what the best • way
> > is to cross it yet.
>
> Well you are right in that Mindfest and the Construction Site window have • been
> a boom for membership growth and has definitly raised awareness of our • group
> with adults and kids alike.
>
> These are all good things and we just need to figure out how to handle • them. I
> don't want people to think I was dodging the issue but it is a tough • issue and
> one not to be taken lightly.
>
> _________________
>
> It is very easy for me to take the first step and include an option for • minors
> on our membership form for minors with a check box that says they have • their
> parent/guardians permission and I can add them to the mailing list. We • would
> then have to state whether meetings were Adult only or public with a big
> disclaimer for Adult meetings and then we would have to just turn kids • away if
> they show up.
>
> If I don't get any negative feedback I will probably add this option for • minors
> to receive mail from our mailing list in about a week.
>
> Again I would like to see other ideas related to this issue so please • respond
> to this if you have some ideas.
>
> Eric K.
>
> The New England LEGO Users Group
> http://www.nelug.org/
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
