BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] protecting kids online
- Subject: [Discuss] protecting kids online
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 17:38:27 -0500
- In-reply-to: <52F2A6AC.9060301@borg.org>
- References: <52F26E29.9000906@gmail.com> <52F2A6AC.9060301@borg.org>
Kent Borg wrote: > But putting up content blocks seems the wrong first step, it sets her up > as an opponent, doesn't it? Precisely. That's why I call these things half-assed. What happens when a kid is told not to do something? What did you -- any of you -- do when you were told, as a kid, not to do something? Chances are you did it anyway, and chances are you did it because you were told not to do it. Blocks and filters aren't protection. They're obstacles to overcome, just like slipping out the window after dark. I doubt that's the message you want to give, but that's precisely the message that nanny filters present. Education is the first step. Supervision is the second. Take it with a grain of salt. I don't have kids. I don't want to have kids. And I certainly don't have the patience to supervise them. -- Rich P.
- Follow-Ups:
- [Discuss] protecting kids online
- From: smallm at panix.com (Mike Small)
- [Discuss] protecting kids online
- References:
- [Discuss] protecting kids online
- From: eric.chadbourne at gmail.com (Eric Chadbourne)
- [Discuss] protecting kids online
- From: kentborg at borg.org (Kent Borg)
- [Discuss] protecting kids online
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] protecting kids online
- Next by Date: [Discuss] protecting kids online
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] protecting kids online
- Next by thread: [Discuss] protecting kids online
- Index(es):