1  2  |   Order by index

Jun 29, 2004, 2:50am

Of course there's no substitute, Im not talking about substituting, Im
talking about there being things *in addition to*. You're still
thinking of terms of it having to be all one or the other, black and
white. Just because a parent is concerned about things in society that
their child is exposed to does NOT automatically mean that they are lazy
parents who expect the internet or tv be their babysitter and don't
give a damn about what they do or don't know what they do, or that they
must not being doing a very good job at home with the child, or that
they are expecting others to raise their child for them. Im NOT talking
about replacing the parents role in caring for their child. Im talking
about 150% concern for your child at home, and 150% concern for your
child's environment out of the home, or online. Children first, always.
Society can't turn a blind eye to children and trample over them
treating them any way they feel like, not caring, because the child is
'someone else's problem' so why care to treat them with respect. Im
talking about the parent building up trust in the home and doing all
they can to teach their child right at home AND about there being
concern for a child's environment and the roles that others play as well
in their child's life. There needs to be both.

[View Quote] > Kathryn,
>
> There is no substitute to trust. If a parent can not build up a
> relationship of trust with his/her own child, who will?
>
> I'm not advocating unequivocal trust to everything that comes by you.
> I'm just stating something that seems to me inherent in the human
> race: take care of your children. Do not rely on external means to
> control them, the best is that you, as a parent, become aware of
> possible dangers and teach your children to avoid them. But also, that
> you realise your own limitations in seeing the world, and accept when
> your own make a different decision than what you would have liked them
> to do.
>
> False securities are the worse securities.
>
> Alex
>
>
[View Quote]

Jun 29, 2004, 11:13am

Of course I understand, Kathryn.

But don't you think that an adult rating should be enough to stop a
child? How many barriers does one have to build, and at what cost?
Where do you stop building barriers? If a child does not stop at the
clearly visible first barrier, the world rating, what garantee do you
have it will not go into your drawer, pick up your credit card, and
punch the number? After all, it's not spending money... What would
the next barrier then look like? Adult worlds usually, besides the
adult world rating which can be blocked by parents, have a welcome
message stating that children are not allowed in. Often they have a
bot asking for the age. Three barriers. Add more if you want... I
don't think that will help. If a child is already prepared to jump
these barriers, then there is probably something wrong with the
child's behaviour, not with the barrier. Adding more barriers could
simply mean new challenges for that child.

That's my opinion, anyway. I don't think it's black and white :)

Alex

[View Quote] >Of course there's no substitute, Im not talking about substituting, Im
>talking about there being things *in addition to*. You're still
>thinking of terms of it having to be all one or the other, black and
>white. Just because a parent is concerned about things in society that
>their child is exposed to does NOT automatically mean that they are lazy
>parents who expect the internet or tv be their babysitter and don't
>give a damn about what they do or don't know what they do, or that they
>must not being doing a very good job at home with the child, or that
>they are expecting others to raise their child for them. Im NOT talking
>about replacing the parents role in caring for their child. Im talking
>about 150% concern for your child at home, and 150% concern for your
>child's environment out of the home, or online. Children first, always.
> Society can't turn a blind eye to children and trample over them
>treating them any way they feel like, not caring, because the child is
>'someone else's problem' so why care to treat them with respect. Im
>talking about the parent building up trust in the home and doing all
>they can to teach their child right at home AND about there being
>concern for a child's environment and the roles that others play as well
>in their child's life. There needs to be both.
>
[View Quote]

Jun 30, 2004, 12:38pm

The post that was deleted was deleted for language. We do not take the time
to sort through all the posts and weed out the ones with the naughty words
(notice my censorship below, I don't like the word you used), nor do we take
the time to save the original post that was replied to so that the thread
can continue.

Activeworlds is a software that allows people to communicate across the
internet and interact through the use of avatars in a simulated 3D
environment. Just as the phone company is not responsible for what you say
on or do with your phone AW does not control what you do with AW software,
what you build or say here. In fact, AW is probably not even aware of some
of the things that you take for granted as being part of a global community.

AWI has added features (at the customers request) that allow users to set
world ratings and access settings. Default settings for the client are G
and PG. Worlds that exceed this rating are not shown unless YOU the client
set them. I am unclear how you can complain about worlds that you have
asked to see. If you go into an "R" or "X" movie would it be reasonable to
complain about the things you see and hear? In the same way YOU set YOUR
client and can password it to YOUR liking. World owners are required to set
their world to a setting that reflects their content. This is for you as
citizens and world owners to set. AWI does not monitor these uses as an
ongoing practice, and I am sure YOU would not want us to. If a world is
being used for illegal activity and we become aware of it we are required by
federal law to cancel the operators license. If a complaint is made that a
world has a lower setting than it should we make a request to the world
owner to remedy the problem. "BSDM" and "Gor" worlds should be set at "X"
by default. If you see ones that are not please feel free to contact us at
abuse at activeworlds.com so that we can contact the operator.

This thread will probably self destruct or internally combust within
seconds.

E


[View Quote]

Jun 30, 2004, 9:23pm

Thank you, E N Z O! Finally some reason around here. :) Hopefully
everyone can calm down now. You heard it straight from the "horse's
mouth" (E N Z O is the CEO of the company that runs AW, for those that
didn't know).

So, to sum up his post, if you have a problem with a world and it is
against AWI's policies, then send an e-mail to them at
abuse at activeworlds.com like E N Z O said.

Builderz
http://www.3DHost.net

[View Quote] > The post that was deleted was deleted for language. We do not take the time
> to sort through all the posts and weed out the ones with the naughty words
> (notice my censorship below, I don't like the word you used), nor do we take
> the time to save the original post that was replied to so that the thread
> can continue.
>
> Activeworlds is a software that allows people to communicate across the
> internet and interact through the use of avatars in a simulated 3D
> environment. Just as the phone company is not responsible for what you say
> on or do with your phone AW does not control what you do with AW software,
> what you build or say here. In fact, AW is probably not even aware of some
> of the things that you take for granted as being part of a global community.
>
> AWI has added features (at the customers request) that allow users to set
> world ratings and access settings. Default settings for the client are G
> and PG. Worlds that exceed this rating are not shown unless YOU the client
> set them. I am unclear how you can complain about worlds that you have
> asked to see. If you go into an "R" or "X" movie would it be reasonable to
> complain about the things you see and hear? In the same way YOU set YOUR
> client and can password it to YOUR liking. World owners are required to set
> their world to a setting that reflects their content. This is for you as
> citizens and world owners to set. AWI does not monitor these uses as an
> ongoing practice, and I am sure YOU would not want us to. If a world is
> being used for illegal activity and we become aware of it we are required by
> federal law to cancel the operators license. If a complaint is made that a
> world has a lower setting than it should we make a request to the world
> owner to remedy the problem. "BSDM" and "Gor" worlds should be set at "X"
> by default. If you see ones that are not please feel free to contact us at
> abuse at activeworlds.com so that we can contact the operator.
>
> This thread will probably self destruct or internally combust within
> seconds.
>
> E

Jun 30, 2004, 9:54pm

Agreed. This post was beating a dead horse anyways. Tis why they have
the ratings. I used to feel the same way back around when one was
nominated for a CY... then they set the rating features and now they
have a rule on that as well I believe. Just don't visit those worlds!!!
*G*

[View Quote] --
Elyk
kfoerst at sbcglobal.net

Jul 6, 2004, 7:31am

they will especially do it out of curiosity. the more barriers you set up
the more curious a child will become as to why its so forbidden to do a
certain thing
[View Quote]

1  2  |   Order by index