Age Restrictions needed on ATS

I am thinking there should definitely be an age restriction for the elderly. A mandatory retirement for all those crotchety old folks. Maybe by the time I reach the double nickle this site will have wised up and will force me to retire. At least 65 or 67 years old, I mean come on! I'll tell you what, if you guys haven't kicked me out of this site by the time I reach 80 I might just quit...and if I make past my 90's and I haven't quit and nobody has kicked me out yet, well there you go then! Yep, if nobody's kicked me out when I'm 99 years old I will definitely quit, I mean enough is enough.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
I am thinking there should definitely be an age restriction for the elderly. A mandatory retirement for all those crotchety old folks. Maybe by the time I reach the double nickle this site will have wised up and will force me to retire. At least 65 or 67 years old, I mean come on! I'll tell you what, if you guys haven't kicked me out of this site by the time I reach 80 I might just quit...and if I make past my 90's and I haven't quit and nobody has kicked me out yet, well there you go then! Yep, if nobody's kicked me out when I'm 99 years old I will definitely quit, I mean enough is enough.

Uh NO!

I'm probably younger minded and more open to ideas in my 60s - - then I ever was in my 20s.

reply to post by LASTofTheV8s


I've also noticed a lot of older members on ATS. Perhaps it needs an upper age restriction to weed out those with alzheimers disease, and curmudgeons. Since the older a person gets the more they lose their mind, as we all know.

[edit on 7-1-2010 by SpacePunk]

I don't think the owners are gonna go for the whole ATS Death Panel idea.

Peace

reply to post by Dr Love


Exactly. I used to get in heated debates over 'site suggestions' I was adamantly against. Then I eventually realized it's not the same as an official announcement so I decided to save my passionate ramblings for things that seemed more plausible.



Everyone, there are a lot of tempers flaring in this thread and several emotional and personal-aimed responses. Keep in mind this most likely will never be enacted. Mainly due to the fact it's impossible to tell a members true age and people can claim to be as old as they want while we'll be none the wiser.

So don't stress.

If parents want their children to visit ATS, then let them have a internet connection.

If parents do not want their children to visit ATS, then cut the internet cord.

Simple as that.

It all boils down to how a parent wants to parent the children.

Being the father of 5 (yes, count 'em FIVE) children I do sympathize with your concern but, the reality is, the parents of this world have the responsibility to govern what their children consume.

For those who fear their children are perusing improper sites, either cut the cord, limit their access via the router or implement the parental controls most every browser comes with.

As a publisher and a businessman I rely on our Terms and Conditions of use to protect ALL of our members (be they 5 years old or 105 years old) to the extent anyone can be "protected" online. We also rely on our outstanding membership to report violations of the TAC and our exquisite volunteer staff typically removes them immediately.

ATS will not be adding any age requirements.

As has been pointed out in this thread, they are absolutely useless anyway. Even erecting a "paywall" that requires a credit card won't stop a determined youth from grabbing a parent's credit card and gaining access.

Springer...

[edit on 1-7-2010 by Springer]

reply to post by LASTofTheV8s

In a general way, I mentioned "filtering" as a way to control what the kids, people who aren't even supposed to be on the site, are exposed to.

Are you serious? Filtering is the act of removing something from a something else before it reaches it's destination - what do you think censorship is? It boils down to the output being "controlled".
Seriously...come now you jest yes?

"grown up free to access whatever information they want. " Well, at this point, I'm pretty sure most of us agree that I know better than you do.

Oh yeah? Where?

As I said, I am not worried about my children. I am worried about the children of people like you.

Perhaps you are an idiot with a dictionary in his lap,

Seriously? Do you people really want to do this with me?

You see, this was something I was thinking about also. But, I'm not sure all the members are ABLE to do that.

Cowards and Imbeciles! Your disease it what is KILLING our lives.

I'm not sure how to respond to you without absolutely crushing you. But I will try

I'm not sure, but you may literally be the Living Embodiment of what is wrong with the world today. How cool

I'm afraid you are losing credibility with every sentence

At this point, you are just full of crap.

You have no idea what you are talking about, and I am not wasting anymore time with you. You really have no business involved in this thread. And, you should take your unrealistic views to a topic that does not involve children.

At the start of this debate I had some respect for your thoughts but after reading this arrogance I have decided that you cannot accept anyone elses views but your own.

And you have the audacity to claim respect for your fellow ATS members.

Kailassa - You pretty much said it much better than me but I was busy compiling this reply before I came to your post and did not want to waste all my gathering

I do not have kids of my own so feel it wrong for me to comment on the rights and wrong of parenting however I feel strongly that parenting starts at home.

Originally posted by Kailassa

Nothing you said was of any real importance. Just more twisting of words, blah, blah, jab here, jab there, blah, blah...

I hope you feel better, empowered, vindicated. Great.
I did not escalate the hostilities. You may want to go back and read each post before making a judgment like that.
I have read each post, so I can actually tell you that the replies were becoming hostile.

When people are just skimming through the words of a debate for flaws in the oppositions argument, without paying attention to BOTH sides, it is a sign of desperation.

As, in your case, it leads to incorrect statements, defamation and unfounded insults.

If you have nothing to add to this thread, except an inept attempt at pointing out my personal flaws, there really is no reason for you to respond at all, and your posts would be considered "Off-Topic".

Originally posted by Kr0n0s
i misunderstood the purpose of your post until about half way through reading it.
If i do understand it correctly, youre saying that this site needs age restrictions due to the content and subject matter?
I dont agree with that at all, you are over-reacting in a big way in my opinion.
You wouldnt happen to belong to any of those groups that lobby the government to force publishers to put warning labels and age restrictions on video games wold you?

im j/k
But seriously, I have two kids, a boy whos a sophomore and a girl in 6th grade and I would have no problems if they wanted to join this site.

What I first thought you meant in your OP was that this site has gone to hell BECAUSE of kids, so ill just pretend you said that.
Then ill throw my support for an age verification system and and for the policy that if you cant buy beer, you cant post on ATS

I first began to notice the viral spread of immaturity on this forum a couple of years ago and it was confirmed when several of the posters began using the same words and terminology that my 6th grade daughter uses when talking to her friends.

Actually, I am pretty sure that I can dig up some posts that you would NOT want your 6th grader, and maybe even your sophomore to view.
But, that is no slight to you. Maybe you just haven't come across them yet, or haven't been here as long as I have.
It's a combination of:
1. Protecting the kids from some of the site content. A lot of these topics have no business bouncing around in a kid's head.
and
2. Protecting the kids from some of the site members views, opinions and mania, which are posted as Facts, no matter how sick, incorrect or irresponsible they are.
and
3. Protecting the kids from some of the site member advice, which is posted as proven, solid and healthy, whether it is or not.

This reply by Springer answers quiet clearly your question.

Originally posted by Springer
Being the father of 5 (yes, count 'em FIVE) children I do sympathize with your concern but, the reality is, the parents of this world have the responsibility to govern what their children consume.

For those who fear their children are perusing improper sites, either cut the cord, limit their access via the router or implement the parental controls most every browser comes with.

As a publisher and a businessman I rely on our Terms and Conditions of use to protect ALL of our members (be they 5 years old or 105 years old) to the extent anyone can be "protected" online. We also rely on our outstanding membership to report violations of the TAC and our exquisite volunteer staff typically removes them immediately.

ATS will not be adding any age requirements.

As has been pointed out in this thread, they are absolutely useless anyway. Even erecting a "paywall" that requires a credit card won't stop a determined youth from grabbing a parent's credit card and gaining access.

Springer...

[edit on 1-7-2010 by Springer]

Thread closed.