| |
In lugnet.org.us, Shiri Dori writes:
> 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
Well, I guess I can add my two cents to this.
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), but I am sure that there isn't much debauchery going on, and it is
rather safe for a sixteen year old, especially one who has attended
brickfests, and done some of the things she has done.
I agree that there needs to be a limit, but excluding someone for their age
alone may discourage them, causing them to lose intrest in their hobby, and
possibly deprive us of someone who can contribute to the group in the future.
Someone mentioned before that she should try to form her own group with people
her age.....that would be rather hard I think. Who among us, when they were
her age, didn't feel strange because of their love for the little pieces of
ABS plastic? I used to pay my brother to drive me from Somerville to Woburn,
just so no one I knew would see me buying LEGO.
My point is that there are not many people her age that play with,(or at
least admit to it) LEGO, therefore she has no one else to get together with to
discuss, build, and trade parts with, and we have the only group in the area,
whether it is for "Adult Fans of LEGO" or not. Therefore her choice is very
limited to us or no one.
Just my two cents
Tom Duggan
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
