-
Sumpfkraut wrote on 2011-03-08 13:56
But then whence the argument that the themata at hand are to be kept away from the immature if not for their immaturity? And if their immaturity is not approved of in sexual and other "mature" topics, then why is it elsewhere? Why the arbitrary distinction? And how can we recognise define the "maturity" of a topic at hand?
I mean I think I know what the basic "argument" is well enough, but I'd like someone to actually go through the ordeal to try and present a solid argument that speaks for this (arbitrary) age/"maturity" apartheid, instead of just pretending it's oh so obvious and that's it.
On a more immediately practical note:
How exactly would I have to handle the common everyday innuendo on normally asexual topics? Am I allowed to do that? Or mentionings of brutal acts or occurences (I trust this is "the other mature stuff") such as suffocating babies, is that doable? The current rules aren't exactly clear on this so I'd like to know.
-
Malogg wrote on 2011-03-08 19:31
Quote from Sumpfkraut;365320:
But then whence the argument that the themata at hand are to be kept away from the immature if not for their immaturity? And if their immaturity is not approved of in sexual and other "mature" topics, then why is it elsewhere? Why the arbitrary distinction? And how can we recognise define the "maturity" of a topic at hand?
I mean I think I know what the basic "argument" is well enough, but I'd like someone to actually go through the ordeal to try and present a solid argument that speaks for this (arbitrary) age/"maturity" apartheid, instead of just pretending it's oh so obvious and that's it.
I agree.
-
manasou wrote on 2011-03-09 08:54
Finally! This is a great idea! I like the request system. Now my thoughts and concerns of little kids lurking around really explicit topics can be put to rest. :tea:
-
Sumpfkraut wrote on 2011-03-09 10:03
lolo, so it's that "innocent children" bull**** again? I thought we've gone beyond 17th century bogus philosophy?
-
Skye wrote on 2011-03-09 12:55
Quote from Sumpfkraut;365320:
On a more immediately practical note:
How exactly would I have to handle the common everyday innuendo on normally asexual topics? Am I allowed to do that? Or mentionings of brutal acts or occurences (I trust this is "the other mature stuff") such as suffocating babies, is that doable? The current rules aren't exactly clear on this so I'd like to know.
Dude, babies die in their cribs often, and that was just a dream. >>
It isn't like I said "HEY GUYS, LET'S GO SUFFOCATE SOME BABIES."
It's like the news section; you can post about children being killed, rape crimes, etc. Just don't condone it.
-
Sumpfkraut wrote on 2011-03-09 13:06
I weren't criticising anyone if you misunderstood my post that way, I was criticising a hastily timbered-together ad-hoc solution with a complete lack of any directions.
And flawed premises, but that's beside this particular point.
-
Skye wrote on 2011-03-09 13:08
Quote from Sumpfkraut;366781:
I weren't criticising anyone if you misunderstood my post that way, I was criticising a reactionary hastily timbered-together ad-hoc solution with a complete lack of any directions.
I think it's a perfectly acceptable solution. If it bothers you, then just don't opt for being in the section, that's all.
-
Sumpfkraut wrote on 2011-03-09 13:23
Okay then would you mind to provide an argument or do you just think it is good and ignore all opposition because, hey, just let me think what I believe is right, it's not like it matters that its premises are completely unsupported by anything but ridiculous bogus philosophy, even if it affects someone.
And either way, it was hastily timbered-together and lacks direction. Even if the premises were suddenly correct by a miracle that doesn't change anything about that fact.
Also inconsistency. While I don't mind the fact that someone talks about their "explicit" dreams openly, I do mind when rules opportunistically get bent. "Explicit" is "explicit". And I think suffocating babies are a bit more "explicit" than "my back hurts because my breasts are so big", wouldn't you agree?
But I'm just a small fish with no power and influence, so why do I even bother. Therefore, this shall be my last post regarding this matter for now.
-
Chihaya wrote on 2011-03-09 13:53
You join this section if you want to discuss "Mature (Defined by Osay) Topics", and you don't join if you don't want to, or don't feel like you can handle, "Mature (Defined by Osay) Topics".
Simple as that.
No need to criticize--If you do criticize something as small as an announcement, it's probably a proof that you're still "immature". (Defined by Osay)
On the other hand, As I browse the actual forum itself, I see too many threads that are just plain inappropriate, and can't really be considered, "Mature", since it's usually just spam created by sexually-excited members.
By "Mature", I had the feeling that it was a forum designed for anyone to come with problems and ask for solutions with problems where...
1) It may be inappropriate to the younger age
2) Jokes would be considered extremely rude, and could be a bannable offence.
3) Topics about sexuality would be okay, but obvious spam wouldn't be in existence. For example, I see "What's your breast size?" or "Are you a virgin?" Which can be considered Mature, but shouldn't be asked in a game forum. It'll probably be infested with guys who are hoping a girl would reply to the thread.
Or for more Serious, mature topics.
To Osay: I think this Section needs definite rules and iron-fist administration. As far as I know, if this continues, there will be people actually stepping over the boundary.
-
NewbieNub wrote on 2011-03-09 14:56
Just put an age limit to it.
Anyone with their birthday or year set to 18 and above would be available to access the forums.
Enter at your own risk, but since you've set it to 18 and above by yourself, then that's just too bad. Enjoy your free topics.
-
Cynic wrote on 2011-03-09 14:58
Quote from NewbieNub;366854:
Just put an age limit to it.
Anyone with their birthday or year set to 18 and above would be available to access the forums.
Enter at your own risk, but since you've set it to 18 and above by yourself, then that's just too bad. Enjoy your free topics.
An age limit is biased and unfair, since there are a few mature people under 18.
Furthermore, not everyone over 18 is mature.
Age doesn't matter, maturity does. Hence it being a 'mature forum section'.
-
NewbieNub wrote on 2011-03-09 15:40
Quote from Cynic;366856:
An age limit is biased and unfair, since there are a few mature people under 18.
Furthermore, not everyone over 18 is mature.
Age doesn't matter, maturity does. Hence it being a 'mature forum section'.
Most of us would like to view ourselves as mature individuals. However, I do believe that none of us is currently suit in for that particular tag.
Hope you do understand that.
There is nothing wrong with the age limit. In fact, I do believe you can change it through the control panel.
Or, alternatively, set an option that toggles the forum hidden or non-hidden to you. This way, you can only blame yourself if you set foot in that place.
-
Cynic wrote on 2011-03-09 15:43
Quote from NewbieNub;366876:
Most of us would like to view ourselves as mature individuals. However, I do believe that none of us is currently suit in for that particular tag.
Hope you do understand that.
There is nothing wrong with the age limit. In fact, I do believe you can change it through the control panel.
Or, alternatively, set an option that toggles the forum hidden or non-hidden to you. This way, you can only blame yourself if you set foot in that place.
Exactly-- that is why an age limit is flawed as-well. You can be 30 or so and claim you're mature, but you may not be.
I myself known I am very mature. I have been since I was a young child. (Though I grew and matured in the aspects of maturity that even a hard life couldn't grant me).
Hence why I find letting the Staff decide is best.
-
otto wrote on 2011-03-09 15:52
Well it's not like it really matters anymore. The section is there, and it's been working out fine.
If there's a problem, get over it. Its not going anywhere, peeps.
-
Taycat wrote on 2011-03-09 22:23
Quote from Cynic;366878:
Exactly-- that is why an age limit is flawed as-well. You can be 30 or so and claim you're mature, but you may not be.
I myself known I am very mature. I have been since I was a young child. (Though I grew and matured in the aspects of maturity that even a hard life couldn't grant me).
Hence why I find letting the Staff decide is best.
Even though you think you're mature, does not mean in reality you are. Just saying.