Too young to post?

[ansem the wise]

well yeah i think that there are some things/sites that kids shouldnt post on.
but the strictness is so annoying when people can lie about stuff.
i mean i wouldnt post on something that asked me for something that i didnt want to give.
and if i thought that they didnt deserve what they were asking for i wouldnt want to be there at all.

[thetruepichu]

.... i really don't know what to say. people put an age restriction to prevent underaged people because they think people under a certain age can't handle it. for any site to ask for an age is dumb because the fact that if the person can hold an email, they can handle the responsibilities of the site in question.

[NintendoCoke]

.... i really don't know what to say. people put an age restriction to prevent underaged people because they think people under a certain age can't handle it. for any site to ask for an age is dumb because the fact that if the person can hold an email, they can handle the responsibilities of the site in question.

Agreed. (this is coming from a 7th grader who thinks Activison and EA suck, and that Valve and Nintendo rock. (which is true, as shown in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-LE0ycgkBQ ))

[Kaiserin]

.... i really don't know what to say. people put an age restriction to prevent underaged people because they think people under a certain age can't handle it. for any site to ask for an age is dumb because the fact that if the person can hold an email, they can handle the responsibilities of the site in question.

A lot of them can't. Maybe they think they can, but there are just enough that can't to require that kind of stipulation to be in place.

Never mind the fact that it can make others online uncomfortable to be talking to a ten or eleven-year-old on a site they know they're not supposed to be on, and how it gets about a hundred times worse when you bring in things like erotic content online and how kids lie about their age to get access to it. Especially if it's an interactive site; adults on those sites don't want to write with, chat with, or otherwise be in the presence of someone who could land them in jail or cause a whole hell of a lot of discomfort otherwise.

It's not usually that extreme, but it can get others in trouble because of your lie. As far as most people are concerned, anyone under the age of thirteen is generally not emotionally equipped to be using the internet anyway.

[Spudnugget1]

I feel this debate has bounced a bit between the thought of "How far does one measure the scope of 'Using the internet?' Is it a tool solely of socialization, or an evil hive of forbidden knowledge and concepts no younger individual should be exposed to?" If it is solely a wand of social media, I would agree that the younger generation should not use it. From experience, younger folks have a hard time grasping the concept that sub-forums have their own rulesets, and tend to wind up in silly situations, like posting an ad for a Fan Comic in a Fan Fiction thread.

For the latter, you are dealing with a wider, much more subjective concept. The internet in and of itself is a brilliant learning device, but only in the right hands. If we, the USA (My country, for the purposes of this argument) placed an internet-wide age limit, we would be dealing with an internet censorship scandal (SOPA and China come to mind.) And when I say "Internet-Wide age limit," I'm not talking like a little bar that pops up in a redirect window in every citizen's browser - that's not how we'd handle it. The Government knows better, and they know everybody's age. We'd be looking at a bill that enacted a nationwide parental control, sponsored by the government.

And they'd have help, too. I recall a post talking about personal information being leaked. While that is an issue, remember that companies like Google keep track of everything you say, do and look at. Google Chrome might be fast and efficient, but what is the point when now you have two faceless entities watching your every move?

My best advice is not to use social media outlets much at all. I've spent more time reading about Internet History than all the time I've spent here combined. Compare my post count with my join date. It says something. Probably something about time management.

And I hate to bring this up, but it is at the very least somewhat relevant: Manchildren. They exist, and I can name at least one with a wiki.

[OldManJenkins]

Most websites make you be 13+ because the law says they cant take information from anyone under 13 years old. Obviously, they are aware of the fact that you can easily lie about your age but its just a legal safety net. Usually they arent just trying to get at kids under 13. Another reason they might not want little kids on their websites is so that they can be free to curse and discuss adult things like mortgages and reading the newspaper without being hassled by youngsters. And usually kids cant type or express their opinions in a constructive way.

[Amish]

Anyone should be able to post on the Internet as long as they can handle criticism and can read and write the preferred language of said board, forum, or anything else on the Internet that's socially interactive.

[Richarizard]

The interwebbs is a cruel, cruel place. Don't believe me? Apparently the majority of it is pornography.

Nope, Majority is Spam and Advertisements.

This totally blew my mind when I found this out last year in my business law class. It is illegal in America for websites to collect information from people under 13. If your'e 12, they can't ask you for your name. This law was passed in I think 1997. I was wondering then why I suddenly couldn't play Yahoo! Games anymore. That's the reason.

Pretty much exactly this... Although, it's not just limited to America.

[Celestial Moth]

Yeah the majority of stuff on the internet is spam,advertisement or porn.

The rest consists of information, false or not, though its that information that i feel can be quite detrimental to a teenager. Though
their is a lot that of teenagers that can handle whats up on the internet, theirs a hell of a lot that they cant and that they could
misunderstand or misinterpret. As a result, that misinterpretation or misunderstanding could lead to a number of things including a post on that forum that doesn't make any sense in regards to what might be deemed an arcane or hard to understand topic, in which would stunt the topic in itself. This one reason though
is by fare not the only reason many sites have age restrictions.

Theirs a number of forums in which might offer information in which would and could
change ones perspective in quite a dramatic way if understood,misunderstood or even simply read. The pure fact that on the internet
people often reveal what they truly feel because of the medium in itself and the way people are allowed to express their mind offers an
unadulterated sometimes offensive view/opinion. In that case, any age restriction is obviously looking out for others.
That in itself, is a justifiable excuse to slap a age restriction on the front page of almost any site.
Its understandable that many of these sites with age restrictions might be offering information or even knowledge in which that *teenager*
might actively be wanting to seek out , but weather that person could actually understand that information
or knowledge and in some cases interpret the information correctly, is the reason their are age restrictions on forums.
Because the truth and even false information can be very dangerous..

[your boss]

Your never too young to post, heck after your born, the first word you learn could be Serebii.

[Phlogiston]

Bolded words doesn't make sense in the context. Bolded parenthesis are, as stated in them, my edits and are grammar corrections. Please rewrite the post.

Apparently seventeen-year-old Swedes can identify but not decode faulty English grammar. Notes taken.

Your never too young to post, heck after your born, the first word you learn could be Serebii.

I still don't think that would enable you to be capable of posting, let alone posting anything useful. But that's probably more biology than anything we're looking at here. (And maybe kids do learn to keyboard early. Looking at Tumblr, that DOES seem to be the case.)

[Celestial Moth]

Bolded words doesn't make sense in the context. Bolded parenthesis are, as stated in them, my edits and are grammar corrections. Please rewrite the post.

I probably should take the time to read over what i type more-often, so that more people can understand it properly
and although my post was some what riddled with lazy and careless grammar errors, your post, allows me to highlight the point which i was trying to make.
But i wont re-post the post.

It sounds like you understood what i was trying to portray regardless of my spelling/grammer.
If theirs something on any given forums in which one is obliged to comment on, in this case small grammar misrepresentations.
Then in order to "decode"/ "interpret" that sometimes cryptic and even unknown knowledge or information, a mature sense of logic
and reasoning is needed. If that mature sense or mature logic is not used when commenting upon any post , then the post made in comment
of my post ( for example) may be misconstrued. As my post also could have been misconstrued by others,but those with mature logic and mature
mental capabilities are able to correctly interpret unknown knowledge or information and receive the correct message/knowledge portrayed
or projected through words.
Though not all people underage are capable of correctly interpreting knowledge or information on the internet, their are some that are and some
that can contribute great things to a number of other things. But because a lot can not, in order to prevent stunted knowledge and further misinterpretations
of a post , some forums put age restrictions.

[Kaiserin]

It sounds like you understood what i was trying to portray regardless of my spelling/grammer.
If theirs something on any given forums in which one is obliged to comment on, in this case small grammar misrepresentations.
Then in order to "decode"/ "interpret" that sometimes cryptic and even unknown knowledge or information, a mature sense of logic
and reasoning is needed. If that mature sense or mature logic is not used when commenting upon any post , then the post made in comment
of my post ( for example) may be misconstrued. As my post also could have been misconstrued by others,but those with mature logic and mature
mental capabilities are able to correctly interpret unknown knowledge or information and receive the correct message/knowledge portrayed
or projected through words.
Though not all people underage are capable of correctly interpreting knowledge or information on the internet, their are some that are and some
that can contribute great things to a number of other things. But because a lot can not, in order to prevent stunted knowledge and further misinterpretations
of a post , some forums put age restrictions.

Don't worry about it too much. He's just being anal about a language he's not even really perfect in himself. (Hell, most of the people on this forum aren't, regardless of whether it's their mother tongue or not.) Like you said, he managed to understand the gist of it, even if word choice caused a misunderstanding based on nuances.

Speaking of nuances, what you mentioned about interpreting knowledge is something that is gained as one gets older and more mature through actually participating in conversation and learning those nuances through experiences. Kids just don't have that, and often don't have the ability just yet to understand why using something with an especially strong, negative underlying meaning (using racial/homophobic slurs, etc.) is a bad idea. They can and will learn, but... it can be problematic when they're in that phase of thinking they're totally on the same level as adults, yanno!

[Phlogiston]

I forgot that "Too young to post?" actually translates in Swedish to "Ludwig gets anal-retentive about other users' typing on the Internet." -- how could I possibly forget something that important? That's a very common phrase, isn't it?

Speaking of nuances, what you mentioned about interpreting knowledge is something that is gained as one gets older and more mature through actually participating in conversation and learning those nuances through experiences. Kids just don't have that, and often don't have the ability just yet to understand why using something with an especially strong, negative underlying meaning (using racial/homophobic slurs, etc.) is a bad idea. They can and will learn, but... it can be problematic when they're in that phase of thinking they're totally on the same level as adults, yanno!

That too. Though, as far as "can and will learn," sometimes I'm not sure about will. Can, yes -- of course they can learn, but whether or not they will... that is difficult. It's either that or I'm a cynical bastard regarding the average person who says things like "TITS OR GTFO" and calls people "******s" on Call of Duty and the like.

[Kaiserin]

I forgot that "Too young to post?" actually translates in Swedish to "Ludwig gets anal-retentive about other users' typing on the Internet." -- how could I possibly forget something that important? That's a very common phrase, isn't it?

Yeah, pretty much. Like shouting **** YOU into a room instead of hello; it's an easy mistake to make.

That too. Though, as far as "can and will learn," sometimes I'm not sure about will. Can, yes -- of course they can learn, but whether or not they will... that is difficult. It's either that or I'm a cynical bastard regarding the average person who says things like "TITS OR GTFO" and calls people "******s" on Call of Duty and the like.

They do learn, but it's the extent to which they learn that matters. Kids undoubtedly grow as they get older, even if they're not given much opportunity to do so, but in those cases, the changes are pretty remarkably different from someone who had proper parenting/discipline and sought to better themselves in their own right.

So you're right, let me rephrase myself -- some people don't learn enough to make a significant difference.

[Steelers_Fan]

It's the parent's fault for not monitoring their kids activity on the internet, sites should not have to have age restrictions. This all based on the same theory for not having video game ratings: the government cannot simply determine that a child of 'x' age has reached maturity 'y' to be able to handle the content. Everyone matures differently and consequently can handle different things slightly before or after a peer.

[Evil Quagsire]

This is a tricky question because I can see both sides. On the one hand, I don't want to be like parents saying THINK OF THE CHILDREN OH GOD THEIR POOR LITTLE MINDS, but on the other many forums get into more adult topics that kids might not be ready for. On another forum (one I actually post on far more frequently), the mods banned a poster when they found out she was only 11. In this case it made a lot of sense because the forum sometimes has fairly frank discussions about sex, and tons of sex jokes. Here, it kind of seems like people of any age can be welcome. I mean, I'd hope so, anyway, it's an effing Pokemon forum.

[~BrightStarVictory~]

This is a tricky question because I can see both sides. On the one hand, I don't want to be like parents saying THINK OF THE CHILDREN OH GOD THEIR POOR LITTLE MINDS, but on the other many forums get into more adult topics that kids might not be ready for. On another forum (one I actually post on far more frequently), the mods banned a poster when they found out she was only 11. In this case it made a lot of sense because the forum sometimes has fairly frank discussions about sex, and tons of sex jokes. Here, it kind of seems like people of any age can be welcome. I mean, I'd hope so, anyway, it's an effing Pokemon forum.

It actually depends a lot on the maturity, but I do believe if they are not a legal age on a forum with much mature content, then they shouldnt be there.

[Evil Quagsire]

It actually depends a lot on the maturity, but I do believe if they are not a legal age on a forum with much mature content, then they shouldnt be there.

Well, yeah, pretty much. Although, again, this place should be safe for all ages. I mean, we have a swear filter, for christ's sake.

[Thomas Elliot]

I am in the cyber security field and privacy is a big issue right now. Do Not Track is a huge piece of legislation that is being pushed through Congress right now. Basically meaning you cannot track the activities of what an individual does under a certain age.

The internet is a funny place, and kids growing up are so connected to the internet with all of their devices. Every one has their own cell phone. I think kids are too well connected these days, and the world has become a tougher place because of it.
I'm only 27 but the world a decade ago was definitely a completely different place, and 20 years ago? Geez, I have stories lol.

Steelers Fan, it's interesting that you bring up the point that the government has no determination in concerns to a certain age being mature. But they actually can and they have. Voting age, the compulsory age to sign up for the draft, the age in which you can drink alcohol.