RP Party finders being reported AGAIN without so much as a reason.

[MrPresident]

The fact that this thread is still on the front page and nearly 500 posts long now because of people trying to defend their right to diddle kids online shows you exactly why SE feels the need to clean up the community right now.

[WoW]

The fact that this thread is still on the front page and nearly 500 posts long now because of people trying to defend their right to diddle kids online shows you exactly why SE feels the need to clean up the community right now.

Exactly. Section 3.3 has shown us the true path for salvation. But these illegal RPers want to lead us astray.

[EtherRose]

The fact that this thread is still on the front page and nearly 500 posts long now because of people trying to defend their right to diddle kids online shows you exactly why SE feels the need to clean up the community right now.

This is kind of funny considering a part of the community wanted to be able to create younger characters like Khloe but Yoshi said no.

[Saefinn]

The fact that this thread is still on the front page and nearly 500 posts long now because of people trying to defend their right to diddle kids online shows you exactly why SE feels the need to clean up the community right now.

Nobody is arguing that. If anything that's a point people have agreed on, don't diddle kids...which to be honest I would think goes without saying.

[Shin96]

Nobody is arguing that. If anything that's a point people have agreed on, don't diddle kids...which to be honest I would think goes without saying.

Not everyone did. Earlier in this thread, people have mentioned how you'd require an ID card to make sure someone is 18+. They responded by saying that it's not necessary or the online interactions aren't rated. I'm very confident some people here have ulterior motives. If anything, if someone made a good point as to why an activity should be prohibited, I tend to agree and not further pressure the topic. The safety of minors and vulnerable groups go above everything, even at the expense of entertainment.

[Saefinn]

Not everyone did. Earlier in this thread, people have mentioned how you'd require an ID card to make sure someone is 18+. They responded by saying that it's not necessary or the online interactions aren't rated. I'm very confident some people here have ulterior motives. If anything, if someone made a good point as to why an activity should be prohibited, I tend to agree and not further pressure the topic. The safety of minors and vulnerable groups go above everything, even at the expense of entertainment.

Given the number of 18+ online interactions that only require people to be honest about their age and not require proof of ID and with the impression that it is up to parents to ensure their kids are acting responsibly on the internet then I can see how people might end up under this impression without an ulterior motive. It's the wrong impression of course. But in those cases I think it's more people defending what they do & believing it's not their responsibility rather than trying to defend a right to get off with kids in a video game.

Albeit a naïve defense, and for the reasons Liana points out.

I saw people also trying to say that ERP venues shouldn't be targeted at all just because they allow their kids to expose themselves to adult content at a young age (either on this post or another one similar to this one). Yes, kids are being exposed to shit earlier and earlier. No one is denying that, you can literally look at the explosion of teen pregnancies that happened to see that. The issue is, Square is NOT looking at kids like that and are looking at it in the way of the law. It does not matter to them whether or not your 15 year old curses like a sailor and is exposed to sexual references on the regular. How you choose to parent your child does not matter to them. They follow the law where adults are expected to limit themselves and their actions for the sake of the minor.

I don't recall seeing it in this thread, but I could have missed it, but yes, this is totally the wrong attitude to take. Maybe okay from a parenting PoV? I don't know, I'm not a parent and my instinct would be to keep them away TBH.

But I do know I was exposed to stuff from a young age so I am familiar with where the mentality comes from. EG: My parents' approach to drinking was "they're gonna do it, might as well teach them to do it safely" and my experience at university (as legal drinking age here is 18) was that I could tell whose parents were super strict about alcohol and whose weren't. The ones with stricter parents ended up as the least able to handle their drink.

I also grew up on horror movies, I loved Silence of the Lambs as a kid as well as many Stephen King movies, I also grew up on South Park, which I started watching from the age of 10. I was a mature kid and raised in a way I found myself not affected by them except maybe in that horror movies do nothing for me any more and I find offensive jokes funny...but rest assured I know the difference between offensive humour and being offensive. But it's hard to argue "it's fine, people should totally do it this way" because it's not a good model to set an example by.

And with that said, when I tried to check out a Stephen King novel from the library when I was 11 or 12, the library was right to deny me, because it was not age appropriate and as an establishment they had a responsibility to make sure minors didn't come in to get age inappropriate stuff. Just as a bar should always deny minors alcohol.

So I think if one were to draw comparisons, SE would be the library in this case.