|
I disagree with this idea but ok
yes, this is my siggy. |
|
|
@chad, my search history has only legal things in it lol. but if my parents saw it, I would be in a straight camp XD |
|
|
TurklerTRJoin Date: 2014-08-16
Post Count: 187 |
No.
I accidently set 2004 when I was going to set to 1999 |
|
MrPhelpsJoin Date: 2010-02-27
Post Count: 27982 |
"Look, what people do in there free time is none of the business of there parents"
It is absolutely a parent's business to know what their child is doing on the innocent and how trustworthy the sights they use are. |
|
Westdog01Join Date: 2014-12-25
Post Count: 2375 |
Sounds like a decent plan. Over 13 should be allowed to have full access to their accounts though, I don't see what they could do wrong. But, this does stop the younger ones from getting into age innapropriate stuff. |
|
|
If you hate Sally will come to your house and if you don't have ginger tea she will go mad. |
|
TracerialJoin Date: 2015-07-21
Post Count: 614 |
Please explain why -5 Year old should be restricted to the terrible games known as: The Staff Games.
-10 Already Has Such a Broken Safechat, why break it more?
+12 Should have no restrictions apart from Safechat blocking the swearing. Not random words and single numbers.
Case Closed By Terms Of Service. |
|
|
@chad how about no blocking all of the words? type k on a lot of games and ## comes out |
|
|
|
@MR.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.
gotta love wiki no?
If my parents saw my internet history I would be in a straight camp |
|
MrPhelpsJoin Date: 2010-02-27
Post Count: 27982 |
"The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.
gotta love wiki no?"
I don't think parents looking at their children's internet history falls under unreasonable search and seizure. |
|
|
O then change the scenario... A police officer requests to look in a persons file cabinet (without a good reason for doing so) and the person declines, the officer then does it anyway. that is wrong, so is a parent doing it to a child. |
|
|
@kingflyer
You have no rights as a minor. Your parents are allowed to search anything they want to. You have no legal ground to stand on.
Anyway I support chat logging for parents for anyone under 12. Maybe it'll stop the damn ODers knowing mommy can see all the crap they've been saying on Life in Paradise. |
|
|
@inter
Ageism for the win right? that's also a thing, minors have no rights, even though I am an American citizen and I abide by all of the laws, I have no rights? preposterous, And how dare you insinuate I OD. Chat-logging
in general is a violation of privacy, just FYI. |
|
|
I really have got to get a siggy extension, I keep forgetting to put mine
(If my parents saw my internet history I would be in a straight camp)
If my parents saw my internet history I would be in a straight camp |
|
|
This is the cause of your actions:
a lawsuit
many complaints
and many kids are gonna be grounded
there are no such thing as under 5 age players
under 10s just go to call of duty or something like that
what about 11 years?
you hadn't thought that well did ya?
also people can change birthdates
and some enter wrong birthdates
and fake birthdates
so what's the point?
-siggy under construction |
|
|
en effet, mon ami
If my parents saw my internet history I would be in a straight camp |
|
DinoteddiJoin Date: 2016-05-03
Post Count: 3567 |
What about for 5-7 year Olds we have parents choose what game genres kids can play,5-9 safe chat and have filters for genres depending on your age,5-6 Basic games with no kills and deaths,7-8 Weapons allowed,Parents add more Genres,9-10,All Genres allowed,11+ No safe chat |
|
|
OP started a flamewar lol
Get out |
|
MrPhelpsJoin Date: 2010-02-27
Post Count: 27982 |
"O then change the scenario... A police officer requests to look in a persons file cabinet (without a good reason for doing so) and the person declines, the officer then does it anyway. that is wrong, so is a parent doing it to a child."
Legally, these aren't the same scenario. As long as a child is financially dependent on their parents and listed as such on the parents' taxes, the parents have the right to the child's info (not to mention the right to see what a child has been doing on a computer the parents themselves bought).
Your scenarios aren't the same, and it isn't wrong for a parent to view what a child has been doing on the internet. |
|
|
@din howz about no censorship? |
|
|
@Mr.phelps
"Legally, these aren't the same scenario. As long as a child is financially dependent on their parents and listed as such on the parents' taxes, the parents have the right to the child's info (not to mention the right to see what a child has been doing on a computer the parents themselves bought).
Your scenarios aren't the same, and it isn't wrong for a parent to view what a child has been doing on the internet."
My friend I would very much like to get a job or 2 and leave the care of my abusive parents, However the ageist government will not let me. At one time the laws preventing children from having a legally recognized job were useful, and many times still are. however I would lie to leave my abusive parents, foster care is CLEARLY not happening, I don't want to have my grandparents who barely can support themselves paying for me either. So clearly the best option would be to move out and become self sufficient.
And it is wrong, it is a violation of my privacy.
If my parents saw my internet history I would be in a straight camp. |
|
revansaiJoin Date: 2013-05-01
Post Count: 5231 |
I kinda support this.
Kids under twelve should be monitored, while kids 13+ shouldnt |
|
|
@rev
Gotta love violating peoples privacy right? lol |
|