Go back
SAY 'NO' TO AGE LIMIT!!!

SAY 'NO' TO AGE LIMIT!!!

General

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Mephisto2
ps. what about our 'GM' and his 100 kids?
haha. Yes, but that does stress the point. Maybe under 13 users should be able to play, just not communicate. I think this is a great site to play on, and I don't think the experience and skills that you can obtain by playing on this site should be banned for a certain age group. Why Not just let the kids play.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Feivel
[b] but we do give e-mail addresses (which children usually have separate e-mail addresses)

Usually means not always 🙂

Can Russ be sure that the email address (and also the name) is not the parents?

Feivel[/b]
Feivel, you seem to be asking for proof in some of your posts that this US law does apply. Whereas I'd be asking for proof it DOESN'T.

I fully agree with you that there are different interpretations possible. But really, the legally prudent thing here is 'better to be safe than sorry', however inconvenient that might be. Even if Russ did get legal advice, and that advice happened to be so bold as to say the Act didn't apply, there's still the risk of RHP being forced to court one day to prove its case against a US government agency. Not nice.

The reach of American law is exceptionally wide, by the way. More than most countries, the US sees itself as having jurisdiction when there's only a small connection with that country. My instinct is that having this site hosted in the US is more than enough to pass that hurdle.

There are a few reasons the whole of the internet isn't likely to be shut down. First, an awful lot of the internet does NOT seek your personal details for you to use it. Second, those parts that do often have something in the terms and condtions (which no-one ever reads) about age limits.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the law ISN'T strictly enforced. There simply aren't enough time and resources to trawl the whole web and check what's going on. But you can bet that a complaint from the parent of an 11-year-old about untoward advances would focus those limited resources. If you only have a few firefighters, you'll deploy them where you see smoke.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by orfeo
Feivel, you seem to be asking for proof in some of your posts that this US law does apply. Whereas I'd be asking for proof it DOESN'T.

I fully agree with you that there are different interpretations possible. But really, the legally prudent thing here is 'better to be safe than sorry', however inconvenient that might be. Even if Russ did get legal ad ...[text shortened]... imited resources. If you only have a few firefighters, you'll deploy them where you see smoke.
Feivel, you seem to be asking for proof in some of your posts that this US law does apply. Whereas I'd be asking for proof it DOESN'T.

Which one would be asked in court?

Feivel

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Feivel
[b]Feivel, you seem to be asking for proof in some of your posts that this US law does apply. Whereas I'd be asking for proof it DOESN'T.

Which one would be asked in court?

Feivel[/b]
I don't believe the law will actually apply...if anything, it will probably be pulled away. Maybe the government responsible will recognize this, and it is a stupid law. It seems stupid to me...

I am in favour of it, as the Xenophobe thread shows...young'uns shouldn't be exposed to that. Where were the mods whne that was posted?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by D43M0N
Where were the mods whne that was posted?[/b]
There were no moderators at that time.
The forum was shut down because of those kind of posts and some that were worse, and when it finally was brought back moderators came with it as part of the 'new' forum.

regards, Marc

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Feivel
[b]Feivel, you seem to be asking for proof in some of your posts that this US law does apply. Whereas I'd be asking for proof it DOESN'T.

Which one would be asked in court?

Feivel[/b]
In court, I'm not sure. It might be that the agency has to establish jurisdiction first. I'm not sure. Certainly the agency would have to prove breach of the law.

But my point was that GOING to court is hideously expensive. It's a sad fact of life that litigation can be enough to shut down a business regardless of the merits of its case, because of the cost.

Vote Up
Vote Down

I am done with the decision. I don't want to talk about it anymore. If Russ has to do this because its the law, so be it. But I am still dissapointed. 🙁

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by padfoot
People, men, women and most of all - kids. - if there are any of you left...
What does rhp mean to you? is it a site for grown up talk? is it a site for tea party chat? is it a grandmaster 'exclusivo' chess site??

or is it a site for ALL - old and young - to get together - LIKE EQUALS - whatever their status?
I joined this site a couple of years ago, ...[text shortened]... u me, so will all the other kids who DID get excluded...

anyway - say 'no' to age limit...
rec

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by D43M0N
Where were the mods whne that was posted?
hey, I'm sorry if we're not glued to RHP 24/7, and I'm sorry if we don't organise strict 'forum watch' rotas.

I'm not having a go at you personally, but time & again I see "I'm suprised the mods have let this stand", "where were the mods", "his insult was left for 2 hours while mine was only left for 1", even "I posted X and the mod's haven't done anything - how crap are they!"... We're not robots and we're not profesionals. We have lives, we live in different time zones, and we occasionally need to sleep. PM us, alert us, we'll act when we're next on line. But where on earth do people get the idea that we're omnipresent?

No anger or disrespect meant, I just wanted people to know we're human,

Jon

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by orfeo
In court, I'm not sure. It might be that the agency has to establish jurisdiction first. I'm not sure. Certainly the agency would have to prove breach of the law.

But my point was that GOING to court is hideously expensive. It's a sad fact of life that litigation can be enough to shut down a business regardless of the merits of its case, because of the cost.
Going to court and prosecuting stupidity is expensive. Just ask the RIAA and their cronies 🙂

Feivel

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by belgianfreak
hey, I'm sorry if we're not glued to RHP 24/7, and I'm sorry if we don't organise strict 'forum watch' rotas.

I'm not having a go at you personally, but time & again I see "I'm suprised the mods have let this stand", "where were the mods", "his insult was left for 2 hours while mine was only left for 1", even "I posted X and the mod' ...[text shortened]... mnipresent?

No anger or disrespect meant, I just wanted people to know we're human,

Jon
At the time the posts he is talking about were made, the moderator program did not exist.

regards, Marc

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by mwmiller
At the time the posts he is talking about were made, the moderator program did not exist.

regards, Marc
fair point; I wasn't sure if he was refering to when the original post was made (before my time, but not your's I believe) or when it was reposted.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by belgianfreak
fair point; I wasn't sure if he was refering to when the original post was made (before my time, but not your's I believe) or when it was reposted.
Now that you mention it I'm not sure which posting he was referring to either. I just assumed he was talking about the original posts.

Yes, I was around when all the original flaming took place and led to the first shut-down of the forums. And as a former moderator I totally agree with your response about not being here 24/7, etc. It's a thankless job most of the time, and all you can do is give it your best effort in whatever time you have.

regards, Marc

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by belgianfreak
hey, I'm sorry if we're not glued to RHP 24/7, and I'm sorry if we don't organise strict 'forum watch' rotas.

I'm not having a go at you personally, but time & again I see "I'm suprised the mods have let this stand", "where were the mods", "his insult was left for 2 hours while mine was only left for 1", even "I posted X and the mod' ...[text shortened]... mnipresent?

No anger or disrespect meant, I just wanted people to know we're human,

Jon
Sorry bout that...it wasn't meant to be an attack on the mods.

What I meant was that when the forums were shut down, the offending posts probably were deleted, right? Why wasn't this Xenophobe post/thread deleted with that? Or, why wasn't it deleted when it was kept up the top of page one?

Not meaning to offend the mods (please don't hurt me) but I just feel that those comments were disturbing and childish, much akin to the things the fourms were disabled for in the fisrt place.

Andrew.

Vote Up
Vote Down

It is unfortunate that the younger players on this site will miss out. It's a great site and the vast majority of people on here are improving their chess and hopefully enjoying the interaction with other players.
The reality is that there are some bad people out there (hopefully none of them have ever visited this site). You only have to read the news to know that situations do arise where less than favourable conversations do take place with minors over the internet which sometimes have terrible consequences. The worst scenario is that if something was to happen due to lack of protection on this site then how bad would we all feel for not supporting any steps taken to prevent it when we had the chance.