| |
Hey all,
I'm posting here to explain my opinion(s) about the age limitation in NELUG.
I've talked to many people about my stand on this, especially during and after
the WAMALUG Brickfest. Many people there expressed their agreement with what I
said, and some people encouraged me to post about it - so here I am.
In case someone missed this, one of NELUG's conditions for membership is that
a member must be over 18.
NELUG has explained their reasons for this, mostly due to liability issues and
the fact that "they don't want to baby-sit". That was over 7 months ago. See
here.
http://www.lugnet.com/loc/us/ma/?n=140
Let me give you some background about me here, so you know why I'm attacking
this decision.
I recently turned 16. I've lived in Newton (a Boston suburb) for a year now.
As much as I've tried, I do not fit in here. As much as this might seem
unreasonable, my *only* friends at this point are people I'm corresponding
with online and/or by phone. Some are friends of mine from Israel, others are
AFOLs.
At this point I'm craving for some human contact. The Brickfest was the best
thing that happened to me all year in that I could talk to people who share
the love to LEGO, and it was face to face.
It was then when I realized that being kept out of NELUG, I'm missing out on
something great. Earlier, I was just disappointed that they don't allow me to
participate. But now I feel horrible that I'm missing out, and I'm getting
more upset of it with every NELUG post.
Up to here the background.
7 months ago, Eric Kingsley give a few reasons for the age limitations:
> 1. Legalities - This has been discussed at length before and I don't want to
> rehash that again.
I have no interest in rehashing this either. My parents agreed to release
NELUG from any liability issues in a written document, if neccessary.
> 2. Our origional "Mission Statement" - NELUG was initially started with the
> only goal to be to get AFOL's together in an environment that we could have
> adult conversations about a hobby we share. Please don't harp on me for the
> wording here. We know that you all share the same hobby and that most of you
> are very mature and converse with Adults fine. For more explination please
> see #3.
Eric answered his own question here, I think. We all share the same hobby.
Once you pass the "5-12" age recommendation on the box, most people are
scorned or at least misunderstood for their hobby. Naturally this increases
with age, but believe me at 16 I'm getting as much weird looks as I'm sure
some of you are at 30.
As for maturity, I don't see how this applies when coming from people who
repeatedly declare their inner-children to be under 12 and some even younger.
Personally I'm often told I'm mature for my age but that doesn't/shouldn't
matter.
> 3. The snowball effect - If you make one exception where does it stop. Say
> we raised the age limit to 16+ well now we will have all of the 13+ people
> wanting in and so on and so forth. For us 18 is the best cutoff mainly
> because that is the age where by U.S. law we are all considered Adults and
> responsible for our own actions. This is a relatively easy age cutoff for us
> to defend because of that.
OK, so you took the easy way out. That's real nice, and even slightly
understandable, but very unreasonable. Think about it for a second. You're
setting an age limit at the most comfortable age, but it seriously isn't the
right age. At 16 I'm on par with a 40 y/o as far as *LEGO* is concerned. Sure,
the 40-y/o probably has a larger income and possibly more lego than me (not
neccessarily the latter either) but the main point is we share the love to
lego, and in the *same* way, which is (naturally!) very different than the way
a 7 y/o loves lego. The cutoff shouldn't be at 18 - maybe at 12, or 16, but
NOT 18. There's just no logic in that.
> 4. We are not a babysitting service - OK don't throw stone's here we know you
> don't need babysitters but once exceptions start being made this is where this
> can lead. We don't want to end up having parents dropping off their kids for
> a couple of hours and expect us to monitor them for free. This is not why
> NELUG started and in my oppinion if this started happening many of the Adults
> in NELUG would stop comming to meetings and we don't want that.
Sorry, can't help but get mad about this one. I babysit, and I don't think
people would trust me with their kids if I needed a babysitter myself. I don't
think I need "monitoring" either. If my parents "dropped me off" it would only
be because I can't drive alone (yet). Maybe I'd take the T if that'd make you
feel better.
Another point I'd like to bring up is that NELUG is the only LUG that has a
cutoff age, to the best of my knowledge. Many groups don't have a clear-cut
rule about this. It is much easier, and more fair towards the people pending,
to deal with this issue on a case-by-case basis. NELUG decided to have a
cutoff, and I respect that - it's your choice. If you still want to have a
cutoff, that's fine by me. But *please*, at the very least, reconsider the age.
Respectfully,
-Shiri
P.S. I've posted about this 8 months ago (and countless times between then and
now). Feel free to read it here.
http://www.lugnet.com/loc/us/me/?n=116
|
|
Message has 21 Replies:
 | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) I expect, without trying to be too presumptuous, that you also get a few glances because you're in a demographic minority as far as the hobby is concerned, even insofar as it applies to "adults." (...) I've met some 16-year-olds who could (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| In defense of the limit: there is another factor beyond what you listed. The liability issue provides a reason to make the line at exactly 18 (although we actually talked about making it 21). The "babysitting" concern wouldn't apply in your case, (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) you (...) this (...) age. (...) Although I haven't met Shiri yet, or even talked to her, from what I have seen from her postings, she very mature for her age. I haven't been to a meeting yet,(I will most definatly be attending the next one), (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| Shiri (and NELUG), I understand the potential problems of the age issue. I was the captain of a tournament paintball team where we had players that were under the age of 18. There is a much greater likelihood of injury in paintball than LEGO and (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) I am glad to see you took that advice, Shiri. I have been in opposition of this from the start, unfortunately, as an outsider, I've felt my statements were little more than smoke in the wind to NELUG... (...) As you should. After conversing (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) there's _always_ an exception to prove the rule. rules are'nt bad things, but in _this case_ they are hurtful. shiri dori is an exceptional young woman. her thoughts and desires expressed so well here are proof. credit is due to shiri for the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| As the saying almost goes: "If you can't join them, beat them?" If you organised your own LEGO meeting in the New England area that did allow under 18s then I'm sure the Cult-Of-Shiri would make sure it was a success. :) I'm not suggesting a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| I think Shiri is getting a raw deal here, and I think the ONLY way you are going to solve this is by opening up the NELUG group. Let the "Adult" members create a new group. That way you can keep your exclusive "adults" group and make a "public" (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) NELUG can, of course, make any rule they like, and they will. Having said that, I pretty much agree with Shiri. VLC set a lower age limit of 15: below that, kids can visit if supervised by an adult. (And I mean, *supervised*!). I have brought (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| Shiri Dori wrote: I don't think that ý have any right to say something about it, but anyway, here is my 2 Turkish Liras: (...) Actually, being a Lego fan is much more difficult for a teen (I mean 15-17) than the real adults like us. They are more (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| In lugnet.org.us, Shiri Dori writes: <snip> Here are my opinions, in case anyone cares. I admit I haven't read the whole discussion yet (theres a lot to read and I will but wanted to "fire" first and ask questions later so to speak) (OK, I went back (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| All right, After watching this evolve for a few hours from the (mostly silent) sidelines, and getting a general idea about opinions, I'll post another one. As much as I want the NELUG members to include me, I certainly do NOT want to corner them (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug) !
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) I've read about half of the posts and I can see this is turning/has turned ugly. I'm not gonna get into, 1) Opinion, 2) Justice/fairness, 3) Legalities. I'll just say how I feel about it. I never had a dark age, much like Shiri. I know what it (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| Shiri & all, First I am responding to the initial message because this thread is new from the last time I was on and now there are 100+ messages in the tread and I am on vacation and am not about to take more time from it than I am writing this (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) As a NELUG member, I'd love to hear stories/experiences specificially from 16-17 year olds (or 18-year-olds if you were once 16-17 as part of a LUG) who are members of other LUGs in the U.S....this might help me form a more solid opinion if (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.baylug, lugnet.org.us.dixielug, lugnet.org.us.gmlug, lugnet.org.us.lugola, lugnet.org.us.nclug, lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org.us.wafol, lugnet.org.us.wamalug) !
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| In lugnet.org.us, Shiri Dori writes: <snip - anyone who hasn't noticed the debate is under a rock or not on-line> FWIW: I agree with Shiri's (and others, apparantly) opinion that an age cut-off is unnecessary for a club aimed at Lego enthusiasts. My (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug) !
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| I'm all for the age rule. I keep thinking that I wouldn't want to hang out with the teenage me. But it doesn't mean we have to be strict. I mean, if Shiri really wants to hang ou with a bunch of elderly people, perhaps we should allow it. Its not an (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) babysit, that should be sufficient. Shiri has demonstrated a maturity level that I feel would put some of the rest of us to shame (at age 16 that is). And if her family offered to sign a waver, that would be ideal. Just keep her away from the (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations - my two cents
|
| Shiri Dori wrote: <snip> Hello all, It's always interesting to see what goes on here while I'm away. Well after reading the insane amounts of posts from yesterday, I couldn't help but post one myself. I guess I am what could be termed a lurking (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| Shiri Dori wrote: <snip> Hello all, It's always interesting to see what goes on here while I'm away. Well after reading the insane amounts of posts from yesterday, I couldn't help but post one myself. I guess I am what could be termed a lurking (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)
| | | Re: Age limitations
|
| Shiri- Sorry I cannot help you much, as I do not have much of a voice in this discussion. However, take a look at our website under membership: (URL) have a similar clause - It's nothing against those who are under 18, it's just a standard (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
258 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
