Decency On the Hype

[Moviefan2k4]

What I was saying was that the parents could install the filter, while the webmasters could keep an eye out for any content that would go beyond a level reasonable for kids under 16. Both bases are covered that way.

 

[Addendum]

Like children under 16 haven't discovered their father's stack of Playboys

 

[Moviefan2k4]

That's not the point. Children's habits should be monitored. Kids get away with so much because no one is brave enough to draw the line, enforce it, and say, "It stops right here." Kids grow up thinking no one will ever stop them from doing anything they want, be it right or wrong. They have no respect for authority or true morality, and it only gets worse as they grow older. Parents have a limited time to teach their kids properly, and if they don't, then those children often walk a path of self-destruction.

 

[Addendum]

It's the parents responsibility, and if not them, then the other members of their family (grandparents, aunts, uncles).

But it's not the responsibility of the next door neighbor, webmaster, musician, movie director, or tv/movie studio suit.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

I disagree; when it comes to entertainment, the filmmakers (be they directors, writers, actors, or anyone else) are under a moral obligation to treat all audiences with dignity and respect. Unfortunately, it's a code of honor that's largely ignored.

 

[Addendum]

They aren't under any so-called "moral obligation"

 

[Halcohol]

There is absolutely nothing present on the Hype that you shouldn't expect your child to see when they log on and randomly surf the internet. Eventually, no matter how your kid surfs the net, they will run into porn, and things like rotten.com, and other stuff that exists on the fringe of society. It's simply an eventuality, and it's important that everyone experiences something like accidentally finding porn so that they know where it is located and how they should stay away from it, if they so choose. If they should choose to look at it, they know where it is.

My point is that it's crucial for those borders to exist so that we know the consequences of what happens when they are crossed. Just like you should expect to have to meet certain requirements passing the border from Canada into the USA, you should know that you need to be 18 and have a credit card to pass the border into areas in online society where fringe activities like porn exist. Of course, if you are determined, there's always a way across.

There is nothing present on SHH that does not exceed an acceptable PG rating, which is for the most part what the site presents itself as. This site presents information suitable for all ages, yet asks nothing more than the regular parental guidance that should be utilized for a child surfing the internet.

The way the mods are keeping this site suitable for PG at this time is, in my opinion, adequate. They are quick to remove any material that is deemed offencive or improper in keeping with a PG setting. The Hottest Women thread is at worst PG-13, but to be perfectly fair you should know what to expect when you log onto that thread. In any case, anything that is complained about is generally removed or the poster given a warning, so I don't really see a reason for it to change.

You should have to change your avatar if somebody reports it, though. I think that's just basic human decency.

 

[LexCorp]

Nice hat Hal

 

[Moviefan2k4]

I think a few user avatars are well above PG level. There's one user who has a pole-dancer image; a few more have closeups of women's breasts...I doubt any of that is suitable for younger kids.

 

[LexCorp]

I think a few user avatars are well above PG level. There's one user who has a pole-dancer image; a few more have closeups of women's breasts...I doubt any of that is suitable for younger kids.

Indeed but we all learn about that stuff from somewhere

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Doesn't make it right, in my opinion.

 

[LexCorp]

Doesn't make it right, in my opinion.

Indeed it is not particularly right and yes some stuff on here would be a tad much for kids but that's the web for you.

Plus the fact that it's world wide does not help

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Indeed it is not particularly right and yes some stuff on here would be a tad much for kids but that's the web for you.

Plus the fact that it's world wide does not help

All I'm saying is that the average kid shouldn't have to sift through avatars of pole-dancers or breast closeups to find a photo or news item about Spider-Man. Kids get exposed to sexual crap too early as it is; standard websites shouldn't be allowing images like that. Just my two cents.

 

[jaguarr]

I disagree; when it comes to entertainment, the filmmakers (be they directors, writers, actors, or anyone else) are under a moral obligation to treat all audiences with dignity and respect. Unfortunately, it's a code of honor that's largely ignored.

No they are not. What you are talking about is wanting to make everyone else live and abide by YOUR morals. What makes you so special that your morals should be the standard for everyone else? (Hint: The answer is "nothing"). If you don't like it, don't watch it. Period. It's really pretty simple.

jag

 

[Captain_BluTac]

No one is asking for people to actively stop these kids from seeing this stuff but its not exactly a hardship to not post obscene images and i support the rating system and sure if kids lie about there age theres nothing we can do but we dont need to ram that stuff dwn there throat

 

[jaguarr]

No one is asking for people to actively stop these kids from seeing this stuff but its not exactly a hardship to not post obscene images and i support the rating system and sure if kids lie about there age theres nothing we can do but we dont need to ram that stuff dwn there throat

The children's parents are responsible for what they see or don't see. Not me. Not you. Not any artist on the planet. No one should have to censor themselves just because what they say, write, draw, film, record, sculpt, photograph or paint doesn't fit in with someone else's moral views or because people don't pay attention to what their children are doing. Especially when what is "acceptable" or not is going to be determined from someone's set of morals that perhaps someone else will disagree with. Who is right? What makes one person's set of "morals" greater than another's to the point that they should override that other person's completely? Who are you to determine what I or my children can or cannot view? That is my decision as a person and as a parent, not yours.

jag

 

[Moviefan2k4]

No one is asking for people to actively stop these kids from seeing this stuff...

Speak for yourelf. Part of the problem with kids being so out of control these days is the fact that no one sets any boundaries. If children are taught early in life that rules and boundaries are worthy of respect, then as grown-ups they'll develop into sensible, responsible people. Otherwise, you wind up with kids who sleep around like mad before they're even of legal age. It's sickening, and the only way to stop it is for parents and legal guardians to make a stand.

...its not exactly a hardship to not post obscene images...

Exactly. If folks want to post obscene crap, they should do it elsewhere...where kids are least likely to find it.

I support the rating system...

So do I, but I think they need another revamp, so the restrictions are tighter. Kids sneak into R-rated films all the time, and the worst part is that no one cares to stop them. You'd think the theater employees would at least give it a shot.

...if kids lie about there age, there's nothing we can do...

Teaching children not to lie wouldn't be a bad start. I know it can't be eradicated completely, but kids would tell fewer lies if they knew that doing so carried a moral penalty.

...we dont need to ram that stuff down their throat.

True.

 

[Captain_BluTac]

The children's parents are responsible for what they see or don't see. Not me. Not you. Not any artist on the planet. No one should have to censor themselves just because what they say, write, draw, film, record, sculpt, photograph or paint doesn't fit in with someone else's moral views or because people don't pay attention to what their children are doing. Especially when what is "acceptable" or not is going to be determined from someone's set of morals that perhaps someone else will disagree with. Who is right? What makes one person's set of "morals" greater than another's to the point that they should override that other person's completely? Who are you to determine what I or my children can or cannot view? That is my decision as a person and as a parent, not yours.

jag

I don't think different sets of morals come into this I am one of the most liberal people on the planet but surely there is no valid reason to show photographs that completely irrelevant to this site and really quite explicit and yes I have got my bother to stop my nephew from looking on here but i think if we keep these images we should ban kids under a certain age and I don't care about these images for all I care it could be completely extreme but we need some sort of disclaimer or age restrictions ect and for the adults who don't want to see this I dunno make a rule so that type of pic has to be in spoiler tags

 

[jaguarr]

I don't think different sets of morals come into this I am one of the most liberal people on the planet but surely there is no valid reason to show photographs that completely irrelevant to this site and really quite explicit and yes I have got my bother to stop my nephew from looking on here but i think if we keep these images we should ban kids under a certain age and I don't care about these images for all I care it could be completely extreme but we need some sort of disclaimer or age restrictions ect and for the adults who don't want to see this I dunno make a rule so that type of pic has to be in spoiler tags

Are you high? Of COURSE different sets of morals and peoples ideas of what constitutes morality come into play here. It's what drives this whole damn argument.

jag

 

[Captain_BluTac]

Speak for yourelf. Part of the problem with kids being so out of control these days is the fact that no one sets any boundaries. If children are taught early in life that rules and boundaries are worthy of respect, then as grown-ups they'll develop into sensible, responsible people. Otherwise, you wind up with kids who sleep around like mad before they're even of legal age. It's sickening, and the only way to stop it is for parents and legal guardians to make a stand.

Exactly. If folks want to post obscene crap, they should do it elsewhere...where kids are least likely to find it.

So do I, but I think they need another revamp, so the restrictions are tighter. Kids sneak into R-rated films all the time, and the worst part is that no one cares to stop them. You'd think the theater employees would at least give it a shot.

Teaching children not to lie wouldn't be a bad start. I know it can't be eradicated completely, but kids would tell fewer lies if they knew that doing so carried a moral penalty.

True.

well i don't really want SHH to become post Wiemar Germany but there should just be some clearer limits or something like spoiler tags to put these images in I prefer the spoiler tags idea because people are always gonna push limits i.e in images girls always have to wear at least underwear or a bikini ect and then sum1 will show a picture of girl in a cellophane bikini

 

[Captain_BluTac]

Are you high? Of COURSE different sets of morals and peoples ideas of what constitutes morality come into play here. It's what drives this whole damn argument.

jag

it doesn't have to be about morals but it could just be about common courtesy no different from saying please and thankyou

 

[jaguarr]

it doesn't have to be about morals but it could just be about common courtesy no different from saying please and thankyou

Without the fundamental disagreement over morals at the root of it, there's no need for common courtesy because no one would be offended by anything that gets posted here.

jag

 

[Captain_BluTac]

Without the fundamental disagreement over morals at the root of it, there's no need for common courtesy because no one would be offended by anything that gets posted here.

jag

You don't need to think something is wrong to be offended by it like for instance most people in the west are lustful and gluttonous but if a terrorist said it I would find that offensive

 

[jaguarr]

You don't need to think something is wrong to be offended by it like for instance most people in the west are lustful and gluttonous but if a terrorist said it I would find that offensive

Your morals are what guides your sense of right and wrong and what is offensive and what is not. If your fundamental morals weren't offended by pictures of scantily clad women in the Hottest Women thread at least at some level, for example, you wouldn't feel compelled to censor your brother and nephew's ability to view it nor would you feel compelled to want to censor an entire site as a whole. How does that not compute?

I'll give you another example. Part of my moral code is personal responsibility and the freedom to make one's own choices in life without having someone drive their ideals down another person's throat. I find the very idea of censorship, as suggested in this thread, deplorable and disgusting, not to mention horribly draconian. Am I crying out for this thread to be closed? No. The same goes for the people who continually find ways to interject something about God, Jesus or Christianity into nearly every single conversation no matter how off topic or inappropriate it may be to do so. I find that 1,000 times more offensive than a picture of some woman's cleavage. But I don't decry what they've said and demand that they be censored; I simply ignore what they wrote and move on. I have a feeling that those people really wouldn't like it if I demanded that they be silenced or have some silly rating system applied to their posts any more than anyone else. Yet there's somehow this double-standard for some of these folks that it's okay to censor other people if they feel it's morally justified.

How about you just worry about yourself?

jag

 

[Warhammer]

You don't need to think something is wrong to be offended by it like for instance most people in the west are lustful and gluttonous but if a terrorist said it I would find that offensive