IEyed Eel - Section For Younger Fans Or Parental Section in Code of Conduct? - Eels Blogs

In response to Carlo's suggestion, is this something that Phil should consider?As things stand with this site, there are no age restrictions for viewing or joining as a member. Maybe I've missed something in the code of conduct, but it reads as being suitable for children to read.The reality is that there is plenty of robust and "colourful" debate on this site. This is probably not child suitable (meaning that most children would not have the breadth of experience or the language skills to engage in such discussions) nor is it child friendly.Obviously I would not want the forum discussions to be flooded with children's blogs. We should not have to be guessing that the blog could have been written by a younger mind. (I'm sure that this comment is triggering thoughts about the members here with younger minds!)Nonetheless, it is reasonable to expect that a fan site is going to attract younger bloggers or viewers, especially at a time when our site is making some headlines through the coterie. Parents monitoring their children's use of the Internet might glance at the blog lists and main page and see football content, therefore deeming it as suitable.I totally agree that any child using the Internet for social interaction should be monitored by parents. The reality is, and I can't stress this strongly enough, that this doesn't happen. Young children are creating Facebook accounts or other social networking accounts.Should there be something added to the code of conduct for parents to stipulate that the expectation is that there will not be unsupervised children blogging on this site with maybe some symbol to be added to any account of someone say 16 or younger? (Eg Junior Member) such members could have restrictions such as not being able to access or view the cupboard or to personally message with other members. Should we stipulate that people under the age of 16 not be permitted to hold an account? Should we have a junior section?At a time of increased awareness of this site, it may be food for thought.

Sixties, great blog. Challenging ideas. Best we can do is Respect each other, regardless of age or just not interact.

An internet site isn't really suited as a surrogate parent.

Bottom line, parents or guardians as well as kid's real life friends (or who they hang out ) have the best opportunity to influence kids behaviour, beliefs, morals and perceptions.

Personally, I think creating age demarcation & some kind of pseudo protection for younger members will not really work in reality (though it may appear politically correct and feel goody). People either side of the age fence will find tenpting ways to jump over either side anyway.

Also, how many younger members are there under 16 who blog here ?

There are so many other distractions & games, xboxes, ps, things for them to hook into & many of those are filled with violence.

Then there's twitter, instagram, facebook, blogs. Personally I think as a society it's getting a bit out of hand, and lots of people spend too much time in the digital world and mobile phones. But it is what it is.

My 11 year old, luckily doesn't get into all these social media things (my 5 year old is too young). I would do what I can to discourage him. After all, where we spend our time is where we give our life.

"JT would be the only one who comes anywhere near Moses, but he was at the twilight of his career and one played one season with us. The rest aren't even on the same paddock."

Replies

Hell On Eels October 10, 2015 at 11:13am

Sixties, great blog. Challenging ideas. Best we can do is Respect each other, regardless of age or just not interact.

An internet site isn't really suited as a surrogate parent.

Bottom line, parents or guardians as well as kid's real life friends (or who they hang out ) have the best opportunity to influence kids behaviour, beliefs, morals and perceptions.

Personally, I think creating age demarcation & some kind of pseudo protection for younger members will not really work in reality (though it may appear politically correct and feel goody). People either side of the age fence will find tenpting ways to jump over either side anyway.

Also, how many younger members are there under 16 who blog here ?

There are so many other distractions & games, xboxes, ps, things for them to hook into & many of those are filled with violence.

Then there's twitter, instagram, facebook, blogs. Personally I think as a society it's getting a bit out of hand, and lots of people spend too much time in the digital world and mobile phones. But it is what it is.

My 11 year old, luckily doesn't get into all these social media things (my 5 year old is too young). I would do what I can to discourage him. After all, where we spend our time is where we give our life.
- sixtiesboy > Hell On Eels October 10, 2015 at 12:02pm
  
  Absolutely agree that the site should not assume the role or the responsibility that the parent must take. Nor should the bloggers have to consider that the less eloquent blogs could be written by a young person. Blogs are normally responded to on their merit. Nonetheless, having some sort of safeguard protects the integrity of the site.
Prof. Daz October 10, 2015 at 11:38am

I am partial to the suggestion that their avatar should have some under 18 or under 16 indicator. Something like a Scarlett letter, for instance. And some line in the code of conduct that says it the person does not indicate their under-age status then they and their parents assume responsibility for the coming mental anguish when the big kids get mean.
- sixtiesboy > Prof. Daz October 10, 2015 at 11:57am
  
  It would be as much about protecting the site as is about warning the young bloggers and their guardians,
slip October 10, 2015 at 1:06pm

Kids do not belong here speaking to Adults. Kids being here can only lead to disaster. There should be a strict policy on 1Eyed Eel that you have to be 15 years or older. I would give this site an M rating.
- Carloeel > slip October 10, 2015 at 1:25pm
  
  It's gotta b one or the other , site identifies as over 15 or junior members accepted and easily identifiable by emblem . IMO . And snake no I would not let my boys on here . I want them to respect women :-))
sixtiesboy October 10, 2015 at 1:35pm

This is my point. I expect that I am blogging to adults. I regard this as an adult site. So if we don't identify as being an adult site this scenario may happen. If we don't identify as such then do we make allowances for younger visitors? How many of our current bloggers in their early 20s began blogging here when they were under 18?
Yobz October 10, 2015 at 1:55pm

Facebook also has age restrictions, but that doesn't stop younger kids from having an account.
- sixtiesboy > Yobz October 10, 2015 at 3:42pm
  
  Exactly. But it has the condition that you are expected to be a certain age.
Choco October 10, 2015 at 2:04pm

Great idea mate, get all the children together in one spot and make it real easy for the Pedo's and Devo's in the world : ) look, it was a good idea but just may need some thought before rolling out. I wouldn't let my 16 yr old on here let alone an 11 yr old.