Originally posted by TheMaster37But thats not fair to us! You guys shouldn't have been cussing in the first place if you knew there were children on the site. And you did. So instead of cleaning up your act you're going to simply get rid of us. Nice goin. You'd think that the internet would be the only place without age restrictions, but no. ðŸ˜
If you want all ages to come ehre, then the debates forum has to close, then the moderators would have to delete any reference to sex, and any reference to foul language.
RHP would get fines if they didn't. In stead of closing down and limiting a big part of RHP, they've chosen to set a minimum age.
I fully support that desicion.
Originally posted by Remora91I am not a lawyer, nor have I sought legal advice (I can't afford it!), but this site is hosted in the US - and that has implications, I am quite sure.
For some reason this new law doesn't make much sense to me. RHP is based in the UK. This law only applys in the US. Russ shouldn't have to follow it. 😕
-Russ
Originally posted by TheMaster37It is easy for you to support this decision, you are not going to be affected form it.
I fully support that desicion.
If the decision would be to kick out all dutch from the site (only an example) I am sure you would not support that would you?
I can see people saying "put yourself in russ' shoes", why dont you and everyone who approve with the age decision put yourself in 12 year olds shoes, or in Rachel's shoes for exaple that needs to say good bye to half of her friends.
Shaul
Originally posted by Faith No MoreWhat happens if im less than 13??
It is easy for you to support this decision, you are not going to be affected form it.
If the decision would be to kick out all dutch from the site (only an example) I am sure you would not support that would you?
I can see people saying "put yourself in russ' shoes", why dont you and everyone who approve with the age decision put yourself in 12 ...[text shortened]... es, or in Rachel's shoes for exaple that needs to say good bye to half of her friends.
Shaul
If Im less than 13 and check I m older??
Just so everyone is clear about this, and reiterating nemesio's remarks earlier in the thread.
This is not forum related! The forums are just one small part of the RHP package, and some big changes are coming which again won't please everyone, but should appease the majority, which is all I can aim for.
Anyway, back to the point.
I knew the day would come when I knew I would be forced to take action like this. Very recently on uChess, I received feedback from a distressed parent about someone who "was attempting to have sexual conversations with my 11 year old boy".
They wanted to know if they should contact the FBI.
Now, when this kind of thing happens, you look at the big picture, and react. I have taken this action to protect myself and the site.
The same thing will be introduced to uChess shortly too.
And to respond to you Ravello, this new age limitation does not mean you can post freely and not expect moderation.
-Russ
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
Why is there such a debate on this, Russ has made his decision, thats it. Under 13 can not play on RHP.
So far the decisions he has made have kept this site up and running pretty much 24/7, and I have faith in him that he will continue to make decisions that will keep the site running to the same standard in the future.
How many under 13's are subscribers anyway? Not many I am sure. Just a reminder of some of the things Russ has disagreed with...
* Forums only for subscribers
* Only 10 games full stop for non subscribers
I am sure that stopping a few minors playing for free on a commercial web site is not as terrible as people make it sound.
If you support Russ rather than wasting his time over this, he can get on with what he does best - developing RHP and Uchess for the benefit of the 99% of us over 13.
Andrew
Originally posted by RussWell, yes but could you not have moved towards compliance in the manner described by Remora91 rather than just giving these kids the chop?
I am not a lawyer, nor have I sought legal advice (I can't afford it!), but this site is hosted in the US - and that has implications, I am quite sure.
-Russ
Originally posted by RussjUST curious on why the age 13 was picked. If somebody said "somebody is trying to have sexual relations with my 11 year old boy" and that become a concern (hell, i wish you didn't make the change, and had the FBI use that account to nail the bastard), then why wouldn't the age be 18? I'm not saying to do that (before people start to yell at me), i'm just curious on why that was the age decided on
Just so everyone is clear about this, and reiterating nemesio's remarks earlier in the thread.
[b]This is not forum related! The forums are just one small part of the RHP package, and some big changes are coming which again won't please everyone, but should appease the majority, which is all I can aim for.
Anyway, back to the point.
I knew the d ...[text shortened]... o, this new age limitation does not mean you can post freely and not expect moderation.
-Russ[/b]
Originally posted by shavixmirIt is very sad that this post got 3 recs.
Lie.
Damn. I hate, seriously hate, to be the person to bring reality into the scheme of things, but...if you are younger than 13...lie.
Should we really be teaching our young people that if they can't get the things they want by legitimate means then they should resort to telling lies to get them?
It is but a small step from that position to advocating that they should break the law to get what they want, or do you support that too Shavi?
Originally posted by Remora91This is very disappointing from a young person.
Alright then. I agree with Shavixmir here. Lying is probably the best solution because we can still play and participate in the forums and Russ can't get in any legal trouble. Hopefully this will solve it...
I hope that when you reflect on it you will realise that dishonesty is not a good way to achieve your goals.
Originally posted by jcandanceAsk Congress. They picked it.
jUST curious on why the age 13 was picked. If somebody said "somebody is trying to have sexual relations with my 11 year old boy" and that become a concern (hell, i wish you didn't make the change, and had the FBI use that account to nail the bastard), then why wouldn't the age be 18? I'm not saying to do that (before people start to yell at me), i'm just curious on why that was the age decided on
Originally posted by latex bishopI'll tell you why:
Why is there such a debate on this, Russ has made his decision, thats it.
Because some people will only claim to be behind Russ when they agree with him. "It's Russ' site!" and "Russ knows best!" posts usually come from those who genuinely agree with him, not support him.
He, no1marauder and several others have made it clear why the policy change was legally necessary: to help protect RHP and Russ from legal ramifications if things beyond his control happen (e.g., when a person attempted to have sexual conversation with an 11 year old).
A lot of the Russ-ites who were supportive with his past controversial decision have fallen by the way-side, as we can see.
You'll notice, however, that he's being a man about it and allowing conversation continue, to his credit (as he has always done except in the most extreme of circumstances).
Nemesio
Originally posted by jcandanceCan you even fathom what this would involve for Russ? It would destroy the site. Just one time would consume more time than ten times a site's work.
(hell, i wish you didn't make the change, and had the FBI use that account to nail the bastard)
We don't know that the person in question knew that the child was 11. We don't know ANYTHING, except that a sexual advance (or more) was made.
It's not that Russ wants to cater to predators (if in fact this person was acting in a predatroy fashion). It's that the red tape involved would drown him.
Nemesio