I know there are many things on rhp which I would rather not have my little sister reading (she's 8... or was it 9?). But anyways, I let her watch the news which has stories of rape, sex scandals, murders, and more on there. I think 12 year olds should be allowed back on the site though. They have a lot more maturity than a 8 or 9 year old. Do we even have any players that are under 11?
An age limit to open an account at RHP isn't new.
It's in the TOS, which we all had to agree to several months ago. (See section 3). It just hasn't been enforced. I'm not sure what the legal age to form a binding contract is when you're talking about an international community, but I'm sure it's older than 13.
regards, Marc
Aren't we all forgetting that this action is to protect our under 13 year olds.
As this is a large community on here and the ability of private messaging I think under 13 yr olds are left open to chatting with total strangers, more often than not a lot older than them.
I don't think its just a case of what the young are exposed to in the forums I think it also covers of who the young are exposed to.
I am no prude, and I honestly don't think anything written in these forums (anything I have read anyway) could be quite harmful to children (except the strong forceful religion posts).
But would you like your young child talking to "older" strangers.
Russ's decision protects himself, the RHP site and our children.
I for one support it.
Please read Russ' post carefully. It's not just about the forums. It's about reducing a minor's potential interaction with a ill-meaning stranger:
Originally posted by Russ
I have made a decision about a minimum age for users of this site.
I decided, on balance, that is probably not a good idea to promote the site to children younger that 13.
This is not because of the forum content alone, but also because the very nature of correspondence chess requires frequent private communication with strangers.
This also allows us to comply with COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) because we do not want to seek parental consent for every minor that attempts to join this site.
-Russ
Originally posted by eyeqpcBut whats to stop those very same children from going to yahoo chess? Wouldn't we rather have them here (which is much safer and moderate!) than handing them over to that kind of junk? It seems like they would have a better chance of not being exposed to sex, drugs, and other things here than at other chess sites. After all, some of those don't have mods!!!
Aren't we all forgetting that this action is to protect our under 13 year olds.
As this is a large community on here and the ability of private messaging I think under 13 yr olds are left open to chatting with total strangers, more often than not a lot older than them.
I don't think its just a case of what the young are exposed to in the forums I think i ...[text shortened]... s.
Russ's decision protects himself, the RHP site and our children.
I for one support it.
Originally posted by Remora91I whole-heartedly agree. We know the majority of people here at RHP are responsible and we would like to keep everyone here where we know its relatively safe, and we know the mods are on the ball (even if not always right). But put yourself in Russ's shoes. He has here probably the all-round best internet correspondence chess site around, if you had that wouldn't you want to protect the site, its members and its reputation.
But whats to stop those very same children from going to yahoo chess? Wouldn't we rather have them here (which is much safer and moderate!) than handing them over to that kind of junk? It seems like they would have a better chance of not ...[text shortened]... at other chess sites. After all, some of those don't have mods!!!
I gave my grandson (11 years) a pawnstar to become a full member of RHP. This evening he called me with tears of rage and frustration because his access to RHP is suddenly barred. RHP is (was?) one of his highlights. I told him to ignore the ban for the moment and promised to raise my voice.
This is not the right way to deal with minors.
It is incorrect to punish a group for the misbehavior (?) of others. Is RHP really detrimental for young people? Has RHP developed into a place unsafe for them? I doubt that strongly. But such judgements are at the end for Russ c.s. But this sudden ban is unfair and not to explain. If you feel there should be a age limit. start than from now with new members but don't punish the ones that have become part of RHP and for which RHP has become an important part of their lives.
Fjord
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
Originally posted by eyeqpcYes, this is very true. I have heard some of the younger members of the site talking about creepy people asking them personal questions and this has always concerned me.
Aren't we all forgetting that this action is to protect our under 13 year olds.
As this is a large community on here and the ability of private messaging I think under 13 yr olds are left open to chatting with total strangers, more often than not a lot older than them.
I don't think its just a case of what the young are exposed to in the forums I think i ...[text shortened]... s.
Russ's decision protects himself, the RHP site and our children.
I for one support it.
It is important to remember, if the unthinkable did happen, at the end of the day only one guy is responsible for what goes on this site, so I am all sure we can respect Russ is doing what he can to ensure he never has to have something like that on his concense.
Andrew
Alright. We know that there are some creeps on rhp. And how many of them still play here? My guess is they moved on. And we know that some things in the forums are not okay for a little kid to see. But its like saying, "Well. This site is full of dogs and a few of them are rabid. But it would be safer for you to go some where else." But the only some where elses are sites full of wolves!!! They have a better chance here than anywhere else!
Originally posted by fjord
I gave my grandson (11 years) a pawnstar to become a full member of RHP. This evening he called me with tears of rage and frustration because his access to RHP is suddenly barred. RHP is (was?) one of his highlights. I told him to ignore the ban for the moment and promised to raise my voice.
This is not the right way to deal with minors.
It is incorrect ...[text shortened]... ave become part of RHP and for which RHP has become an important part of their lives.
Fjord
The Internet, in its current form, isn't a great place for 10 and 11-year-olds, etc. to be surfing around on unsupervised anyway, whether it be a chess site or not (and we know most of the parents aren't going to sit down right in front of the monitor with their kid the whole time). My niece is 10 and her mom just found out that she has a Yahoo mail account, where she receives porn spam and and secret messages from God-knows-who. Every time her mom would walk out of the room, my niece would browse away from SesameStreet.com or whatever and quickly check her mail. With all the whining and complaints about "andreilikeslittleboy" and "*stabs*" lately, if I were in the shoes of Russ, I'd be thinking -- hmmm, do we babysit the forums 24x7, or do we officially declare this place PG-13.
I support the decision.
-f
Originally posted by Remora91I am not disputing this Rachel, in fact I totally support what you are saying.
Alright. We know that there are some creeps on rhp. And how many of them still play here? My guess is they moved on. And we know that some things in the forums are not okay for a little kid to see. But its like saying, "Well. This site is ...[text shortened]... ll of wolves!!! They have a better chance here than anywhere else!
All I am saying is that I support the reasons Russ has done this. Russ is protected, I am protected, you are protected and the site is protected.
I have started running a chess club and there are a few 10,11 yr old chess prodigies, who I would think would love this site, and need a site like this to experience another side of the great game. But I am also concerned for our kids welfare and the welfare of this site.
I do empathise with you , I basically agree with you, I'd rather have the younger generation playing on here than on somewhere like say Yahoo. But I do support Russ's decision, I think for him and the safety of his site Russ made the right choice.