Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil
How do you suggest we verify the age of members?
In the UK there is no need for members to prove their age as we don't have any legal age limits in the way they do in the US. Even sites like facebook and twitter based in the US don't ask for age proof, just state that under 13 are not allowed. That is only because its easier than all the messing about needing parents to agree to them joining.
The usual problem we have with young members is the adults on the site, if you don't like them don't involve yourself in a conversation with them.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less
I liked most of what you said however I dispute the above, how is it the 'adults' fault when they are warning a child not to do something dangerous when he keeps insisting on doing it?
Surely it would be irresponsible to follow the above advice and leave the obviously immature to risk life and limb?
 |
I was not around in the Era of Bee so I can't comment on that situation. However it seems to me that some sixteen year olds can be as mature as a 67 year old ... while a 67 year old - you get my drift I hope. I'm 66 by the way!
I think in the current case involving possible goings on at Churchills/the Con club, as Less says, some of us are genuinely concerned that this individual will harm himself and/or others. As he reveals more about himself and his activities this may become more likely, unless he really is pulling the wool over all of our eyes and really winding everyone up big time.
I think as Steve says above, the benefit of the doubt is in order in this case. Sometimes the poster appears mature and then gives himself away so I think he may be both testing us and also genuinely interested in the old buildings he professes to care for - but is not mature enough to go about this in the right way. He needs help to head in the right direction.