cheever (cheever) wrote in news, @ 2003-04-19 16:11:00

slice 2003-04-22 12:03 (link)

Wow you people really are a bit obsessed with underage people using Blurty. Does it really matter though, it's the internet, just about everybody on it is fake. Look at those really old people saying that they are 14 so they can possibly meet their victim and rape or murder them. Also the young teens saying they are 18 or over in order to go to "adult sites." I don't see why people younger than 18 shouldn't be able to use a reliable journal service, like Blurty, that doesn't have to be paid for, since obviously people under 18 don't have credit cards. Adults are getting a bit too greedy these days. I hope none of you have children. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	ghaleon 2003-04-22 12:31 (link)
	People under 18 can purchase bank checks and postal money orders, which are generally acceptable tender for online purchases. And it doesn't help your argument much to draw support from cases of illegality. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	code 2003-04-22 14:54 (link)
	16 year olds in the UK can get CashCards too, which can be used to sign up for a PayPal account, so it's not that hard for someone to pay for a journal. I have nothing against the whole 18+ thing, since I hate people adding me to their Freidns list when they "TyPe LyKe D1s f0` joqqer!!" *sighs* (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	ghaleon 2003-04-22 14:57 (link)
	Now THIS is what I mean. If the underaged community comported itself with this level of dignity, I think there'd be no problem. But perhaps I've been influenced by your Azurill icon. :-) (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Re: code 2003-04-22 15:04 (link)
	Sorry I just LOVE pokemon at the moment lol. If I was told to move out of Blurty, I'd just do it, no arguements since I understand how hard it must be for them to keep the site running when paid accounts haven't been issued yet. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	ghaleon 2003-04-22 15:06 (link)
	That's okay, since I must confess a guilty interest in it, as well. Especially since I'm doing Victory Road in Ruby as we speak. And that's admirable. If only we could clone your brain and insert it into other 18- users... (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Re: code 2003-04-22 15:11 (link)
	lol I want the new games now... Ah well going shopping tomorrow maybe I'll be lucky... I've only just completed silver since I went off pokemon for awhile lol. We shouldn't really talk about this here though lol. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) - ghaleon, 2003-04-22 15:27:09

	blu 2003-04-24 17:20 (link)
	Do you know that I absolutely *love* you for the simple fact that you're living proof that not all under-18 people are idiots? Thank you. Thank you for showing everyone that not every teen under 18 tYpEz LyK3 d15 and ... things like that. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

riiva 2003-05-08 22:31 (link)

I think that the over-18 rule is a mechanism, albeit imperfect, for quality-control in weblog content. No quality control is foolproof, enforceable, or entirely objective. But I see blurty as somewhat progressive in seeing sites such as "teen open diary" and realizing the demand for some sort of depth/quality filter. Ideally, it should make the weblogs on the site more interesting and raise standards in the literary merit/thought-provokingness of the posts. Although this has not been wholly succesful, I have met some very interesting people and good writers through this site. I am younger than 18, but do not relate well to my peer group with the exception of about 2 or 3 people. I conduct myself in a mature way and would never thrive in a place such as teen open diary. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	ushichan_haru 2003-04-22 13:13 (link)
	"I hope none of you have children?" Why? Because we'd actually try to take care of them? Make sure that they arn't pouring their lives out to total strangers and lying about their age? Demand that they speak proper english? Not everyone on the internet is fake, either. There are actually quite a few honest souls. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

serotonin_lily 2003-04-22 13:38 (link)

I agree. And, as my add-on to your excellent comment [since I'm really reiterating what you said]: I may be old-fashioned in my opinions, but I believe that children should be protected by adults who have experienced a little of life and can recognise danger when it is seen. Yes, this may be the Internet, but the dangers are still tangible. Alot of minors don't comprehend that they should be careful about what is made public to the world and why other people may misconcieve that information. Like in 'real' life you wouldn't just disclose intimate details of your sex life to a strange woman or man on the bus, so why do the same on the Internet? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	mokona_onna 2003-04-22 14:43 (link)
	I wish I could add something witty and interesting to your comment but I'm afraid you've said it for me. Too true! Mokona (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

summer__romance 2003-04-22 23:56 (link)

I find it ironic that you preach about the underage kids speaking proper english but spelled "aren't" incorrectly. Anyways, that wasn't the point of this comment. The taking care of them comment seems a bit, how should I say this...far fetched perhaps. It is in no way any of our responsibility to "take care" of the kids (since that is what they are) that join and kindly ignore the "Must be 18+" on the front page of Blurty. I really don't see a problem with them being here. If they bother you that bad, just don't read their journals. It's just as easy to ignore them and focus on your writings and those that interest you as it is to complain about them and say you're trying to "take care of them". (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	angel 2003-04-23 14:06 (link)
	There is a bit of a difference between a typo and someone intentionally typing incoherent posts. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

ushichan_haru 2003-04-25 06:33 (link)

I never said I was trying to take care of these kids. I have no desire to take care of them. My reaction was to the comment on hoping that none of us who support the 18+ policy have kids. I would care for my own children, not these strangers. My support of the policy is because that is the way blurty intended it to be, the reason I signed up for a blurty and moved all my blogging activities here. The problem with them being here is that they were never supposed to be here. I don't see a problem with kids smoking, but they aren't supposed to by law, so I support that. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	ghaleon 2003-04-25 07:01 (link)
	I find it ironic that you chose to directly impugn someone else's spelling, yet you seem to have forgotten the correct usage of adverbs: "if they bother you that bad" is incorrect English, since "bad(ly)" modifies "bother," rather than "you" or "they". If you're going to nitpick, you would be well-advised to have all of your ducks in a row, as the saying goes. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	bertho 2003-04-26 13:52 (link)
	have all of your ducks in a row Haha. That's my favorite phrase. :) (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	ghaleon 2003-04-26 17:18 (link)
	I grew up reading "Make Way For Ducklings." It's always the first phrase that comes to mind. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

cow 2003-04-23 14:23 (link)

Not everybody underage who uses these journals types like an idiot. I will admit I'm underage, but only by a couple years, and I have enough maturity to keep what I'm writing under control and type with dignity and use what I learn in school. I just don't know why it's such a big deal for blurty to maintain the age status. I understand it's been like that from the beginning but you all should have the maturity to realize that things change. I just hope you all realize that all you're doing is complaining about your problem with people that you once related to, meaning that you were once their age, you know how they feel. Have a nice day. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

angel 2003-04-23 14:51 (link)

Um, nobody is complaining about Minors being here. The owners of the site, in this very news update stated that they will begin enforcing the 18 and over policy beginning with Free Accounts. They are changing - changing to begin enforcement of their 18 and over rule. It's the people who are here to break that rule who are complaining the hardest, loudest and throwing the tantrums. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	kuraha 2003-04-25 05:45 (link)
	One day you will be a legal adult, and maybe then you'll understand how we feel. Yes, I was 5 years old once too... but it doesn't mean I can tolerate you all. =P (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	lornvourkolakas 2003-08-01 22:00 (link)
	i know its a little late... well a lot late for replying to this but.. just be glad that your allowed to keep your account although your not 18+ (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	kuraha 2003-04-25 05:43 (link)
	I've been keeping online journals with various programs and sites for a couple years now.. I turned 18 last September, and can safely say iI was a "good Musketeer". =P I know a bunch of 14-17 year olds who might as well be 'legal" adults... but unfortunately, many are not in this world. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Under 18? webwriter 2003-05-03 07:01 (link)

I've said this in an ealier posting but as this is where it is most debated how in hell are you going to enforce the 18+ rule? Will journallers have to fax you a birthcerificate, a letter from their friens, parents, 19 year old goldfish? HOW can you enfoce this. Better really to delete all acounts inactive for too long or left abandoned. I cannot delete old journals, they have BEEN deleted but they are still coming up. Get rid of those and you'll add to bandwidth use. No don't ban under 18's it is unenforcable. But you could delete readers only. It bugs the hell out of me to see here and on LJ literally hundreds of empty journals. Voyeuristic prats. Have a (hugg) Delete an empty journal. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)