Originally posted by kirksey957Whatever limit, this is an absurd rule anyway (for a chess site). I haven't read anything in these forums that you cannot hear or see on national radiop/television, or even in the schoolyards of the kids that seem to need all that 'protection'. That doesn't mean I like all that has been posted, on the contrary, but it seems to me that there are more adults that need protection here.
I was just reading the ToS and couldn't find the "legal" age posted. I was under the impression that it was 13 for the site.t
Btw., and on a more relevant note, this is a chess site too. Chess is supposed to be good for development. I read today that in Russia they plan to generalise chess as part of the school program. The tests in Kalmykia, running for several years, appear to prove that the results are beneficial to almost all domains of the development of kids. And they don't mention anything about crazy hormones ...
Originally posted by kirksey957I believe you are right, I think this site has you tic a pre entry registration agreement claiming you are at least 13 years of age, but I am not really sure I understand your point. If you are trying to imply that a web sites legal obligation or a rule set by a web site trumps a parental obligation to their children's welfare, then that is just silly. Many parents believe their child's time is best spent elsewhere. That is the parents right to decide not the TOS. Surly thats not your point is it? Maybe that isn't what you meant at all. ???
I was just reading the ToS and couldn't find the "legal" age posted. I was under the impression that it was 13 for the site.
Originally posted by cashthetrashAs Mephisto2 has said chess is good for children. The game is good to develop all kinds of analytical skills. This site has the advantage of having an "exchange of ideas" as well. At 14, the horse is pretty much out the barn door.
I believe you are right, I think this site has you tic a pre entry registration agreement claiming you are at least 13 years of age, but I am not really sure I understand your point. If you are trying to imply that a web sites legal obligation or a rule set by a web site trumps a parental obligation to their children's welfare, then that is just silly. ...[text shortened]... de not the TOS. Surly thats not your point is it? Maybe that isn't what you meant at all. ???
- Joined
- 05 Oct 05
- Moves
- 63425
Have to point out, that while I disagree with the parents' decision, if keeping her from the site/forums was based on content (and not her posts,) that it's refreshing to see some parents monitoring and controlling their own kid's internet use.
Kind of the way it should be, rather than forum police wannabe's pretending to do the job, without mentioning names.