Call to ban children from Facebook

[TrevorW]

Agree or disagree

:question:

[multiweb]

Question: how? :)

[casstony]

Easy: parents don't allow access and there are no electronic communication devices (or TV) in the bedroom. Apart from the associated dangers, the last thing kids need is another excuse to avoid physically active recreation, or work around the house.

The school my boy goes to has an internet club only available to students at the school - it's supervised and any inappropriate behaviour is quickly squashed but the kids still get to communicate on the net.

[multiweb]

Good luck with that. :) If they don't login at home they'll login from their mate's place or from any portable device. Some even come bundled with FB accounts. Prevention is not possible. Talk with them so they understand the risks and term of use, educate them and they'll work it out for themselves.

[wavelandscott]

Should define "children"...

I said agree but I reckon the cut off should be lower than the drinking age (a smudge)

[AstralTraveller]

Perhaps a bit off topic but the discussion does remind me of this.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/10/3134682.htm

In this case all the teenagers learnt some valuable lessons and perhaps the fact that the boy was caught prevented him committing a bigger crime. Further to Marc's comment, I know I did things on public phones I wouldn't have done at home (nothing serious - phone information and ask how many bolts in the Sydney Harbour Bridge) so the issue of prevention is relevant. Perhaps this is just an old conundrum with new technology?

[mswhin63]

Yeah good luck with it especially when many parents are hooked on it.

[casstony]

We do educate our kids and the schools educate them on this topic. Prevention is possible and the rules I outlined earlier are in force at our home. We're very selective about where our kids stay overnight though they will occasionally see or hear inapropriate stuff (they need to be aware of the real world anyway). When they abuse freedoms they lose privileges and have to earn them back.

A big part of the package is providing the kids with healthy alternatives (Tae Kwon Do, swimming, team sport, singing, playing musical instruments, socialising with other families and their kids, etc) and shared family time playing board games, gardening, watching TV together, etc, and especially having the evening meal together.

There's always an element of luck in successfully raising kids but there's a lot parent's can do to avoid problems, including internet related problems.

[mswhin63]

Sometime avoiding issues can prevent the children learning from their mistake. I generally don't wrap them up in cotton wool but the internet is so uncontrolled that is needs some parental regulation. I use time control software to limit access as well as limit content mostly pornography, Unfortunately that is not entirely functional. (Norton) and (Makuamon)

[casstony]

Absolutely, they mostly learn the hard way, but they also thrive on having well defined but reasonable boundaries. They push until they find the boundary of acceptable behaviour; if the parents have not set a clear boundary the childs behaviour will become more challenging; if the parents set no boundary at all the kids are in great danger.

[mswhin63]

Sometime though we still need to set some limits, especially when the limits are breached in what could be considered illegally. This is Facebook in some cases. The legal system is in a shambles so now we have to self regulate, that would be my only consideration to see Facebook banned for children.

[multiweb]

I second that. I always kept both mine very busy with sports and outdoor activities. A lot of kids these days, maybe more teens I reckon, spend a hell lot more time in front of a PC or online than they should. Family tight and knowing what they're at and involving them is also the way to go, so they don't get bored and get up to no good.

The problem with online socialising is the lack of identity and responsibility. That in turn opens a whole new bag of troubling behaviours. It's just the nature of the medium that allows some individuals to get away with murder sort of speak.

At my kids schools some kids email or MSN each other 'hate' mails. In the old days it would have been a couple of slaps in the courtyard. The internet changed that.

[Barrykgerdes]

I got a better idea

Face book is valued in billions. Lets pass some laws that make Facebook liable for anything detrimental to anyone that uses it and have damages assessed against it. It would not need to be banned then because it would disappear as quick as money sent to Nigeria.:thumbsup:

Barry :thumbsup::lol::lol:

[Zaps]

What's "facebook"?

[ballaratdragons]

My eldest daughter (25) isn't interested in Facebook, my 2nd daughter (20) uses it probably twice a week, my eldest son (18) doesn't like it and my youngest son (15) uses it but sparingly. He did say a few days ago that Facebook is boring. :cool: What more could I ask :)

I don't like it even though I have an account. Cheryl uses it occasionally.
So, we aren't a big 'Facebook' family.

Ban the whole concept :lol:

[star1961]

my son has been waking up at 5am to go on facebook. so now ive banned him from the computer completely for three days. including the ipod. its torture for him but funnily enough after only about an hour not having the computer he was out the back hitting the ball with the tennis racket! i couldnt believe it! he does swim in the pool occasionally but apart from that no excercise at all. so now i'm determined to cut back their internet times.

[ballaratdragons]

Well done.

It may seem cruel but cut kids way back.
My 2 boys are restricted to half an hour of computer time each night.
They are fine with that because they are so used to it.
They get Computer time at school too, but it is strictly monitored by the IT teacher.
My boys enjoy going outside so that might be the difference. They are 'country' kids.

[that_guy]

define children... :shrug:

[Trixie]

My 13 yo cousin is on facebook but his mum, older brothers and all of us cousins are all his friends on it and his family computer is in the living room so he has quite a bit of supervision. Judging by the times he posts it also looks like he has limited amounts of time he is allowed on the computer.

I think banning it would only make it more attractive. My parents banned home and away and neighbours for my sisters and I and we went to great lengths to get around the ban. If they had left us alone we probably wouldnt have watched it!

I like the way my aunt and uncle are doing things. My boys are too young to be interested in computers yet but when they do they will have to use a shared computer in our office so will always be under supervision.

[Dave47tuc]

I don't think children should be banned from face book. Tell them they can not use something there friends use.
My 3 children 11,15,17 with my daughter being the eldest.

I'm having trouble keeping up with what my children do with there lap top or phones and ipods.

My daughter has had trouble with face book and bulling and without going into much detail it was a bad time for all concerned. I have been involved with councillors and had meetings with the high school about this.

You can not ban anyone from face book (by the way i don't use it or like it!)
Its all about education and respect for people. But its so easy for someone to type hurtful things about someone else. The main problem they do this on a whim! Their have had a bad day or feel in a bad mood then they can take it out on someone on something like face book.

Its about educating children the right and wrongs in life and knowing what they type has consequences.

I prefer not to ban or take away but to educate. :)

[AdrianF]

Education is the key.

Adrian

[TrevorW]

child (tʃaɪld) http://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.g if (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html)
— n , pl children 1. a. a boy or girl between birth and puberty
b. ( as modifier ): child labour 2. a baby or infant 3. an unborn babyRelated: paedo- 4. with child another term for pregnant (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pregnant) 5. a human offspring; a son or daughterRelated: filial 6. a childish or immature person 7. a member of a family or tribe; descendant: a child of Israel 8. a person or thing regarded as the product of an influence or environment: a child of nature or


Child definition:

A young individual who is under the legal age of majority, or who is the natural offspring of another. Related Terms: Age of Majority (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/LegalDictionary/A/AgeofMajority.aspx), Young Offender (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/LegalDictionary/Y/YoungOffender.aspx), Minor (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/LegalDictionary/M/Minor.aspx), Adult (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/LegalDictionary/A/Adult.aspx), Parent (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/LegalDictionary/P/Parent.aspx)

A minor (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/M/Minor.aspx); an individual who is not yet an adult (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/A/Adult.aspx) or who has not reached the age of majority (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/A/AgeofMajority.aspx).
Most jurisdictions have defined child in terms of a specified age of majority (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/A/AgeofMajority.aspx). But where statute (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/S/Statutes.aspx) law is silent on the point, the common law (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/C/CommonLaw.aspx)applies.
For centuries, until age of majority (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/A/AgeofMajority.aspx) statutes began appearing and taking over the law in regard to the legal definition of the term child, the common law (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/C/CommonLaw.aspx) had provided for the extraction from the ominous shadow of law, the concept of a child; someone too young to manage, wield or otherwise possess the full gamut of legal rights and responsibilities, or be subjected to the sometimes harsh punishments thereof.
In this context, Justice Southin of the British Columbia Court of Appeal wrote in R v Sharpe (http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/1999/1999bcca416/1999bcca416.html):"In this judgment, when I myself use the word child, in contradistinction to when I am quoting someone else’s words, I mean those below the age of puberty. At common law (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/C/CommonLaw.aspx), these ages were deemed to be twelve for a girl and fourteen for a boy. As, however, fourteen is the age of consent in Canada and has been, for girls, for over one hundred years (see the 1892 Criminal Code (of Canada), §269), I define a child as anyone under the age of fourteen years." Or in the 1901 British case, R v Cockerton in which Justice Wills noted that statute law, at that time, deferred still to the common law boundaries of what was a child:"No definition (in the statute) has been given of a child. It is impossible to lay down any definite boundary as separating children from young men or young women or any other description by which an advance beyond childhood may be indicated. Pratically, I suppose that at somewhere between 16 and 17 at the highest, an age has arrived at which no one would ordinarily call childhood." But in Ogg-Moss (http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1984/1984canlii77/1984canlii77.html), the then-chief justice of Canada's Supreme Court, Brian Dickson described child more thoroughly:"Both in common parlance and as a legal concept the term child has two primary meanings. One refers to chronological age and is the converse of the term adult (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/A/Adult.aspx); the other refers to lineage and is the reciprocal of the term parent (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/Parent.aspx). A child in the first sense was defined at common law (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/C/CommonLaw.aspx)as a person under the age of fourteen. This definition may be modified by statutory provision.... No statutory modification, however, fixes an age higher than the age of majority (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/A/AgeofMajority.aspx)which, in Ontario, pursuant to the Age of Majority and Accountability Act, R.S.O. 1980 ... is 18 years. A child in the second sense was defined at common law (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/C/CommonLaw.aspx) as the legitimate offspring of a parent (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/Parent.aspx), but in most jurisdictions this definition has been amended by statute (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/S/Statutes.aspx) to constitute all offspring, whether legitimate or not, as the children of their natural or adoptive parents ...."In the context of family law, the term is usually used to circumscribe those young individuals for whom another, as a parent (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/Parent.aspx), is responsible. For example, the 2009 version of Ontario's Family Law Act (http://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-f3/latest/)defines a child as:"Child includes a person whom a parent (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/Parent.aspx) has demonstrated a settled intention to treat as a child of his or her family, except under an arrangement where the child is placed for valuable consideration in a foster home by a person having lawful custody." Or Chapter 18, §46b-212a of the General Statutes of Connecticut:"Child means an individual, whether over or under the age of majority, who is or is alleged to be owed a duty of support by the individual's parent (http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/Parent.aspx) or who is or is alleged to be the beneficiary of a support order directed to the parent." I think in Australian it would probaly be classed as anyone under the legal age of consent

[Sylvain]

I totally agree with Marc:
1. Prevention not possible, and probably not a good idea as they'll always find a way around it: it's better to let them do it while fixing some ground rules (such as a defined time per day) and being able to monitor at least part of what they do.
2. Keep them busy with alternatives is the key: it takes efforts, but the rewards are greater for everyone.

[gbeal]

I'm with Zaps, what the dickens is FaceBook? Never been there.
Gary

[ballaratdragons]

It is the end of the world as we knew it :lol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook

It has a contagious virus built in, whereas you leave a message for your friend. All the friends of that friend can read your message and it explodes from there.
It is a message virus.

It has its positive benefits though.
If you want some news spread worldwide very fast it is perfect :lol:

but it also spreads bad stuff just as fast and as far.

[gbeal]

Ah, thanks Ken, now I understand why I haven't come into contact with it, nor had the need for it, No-Mates, LOL.
I like to keep myself to myself, and anyone that needs to know where/what I am doing already knows.
Indeed the end of the world.
Gary

Sorry Trevor, hijacking your thread to poke the brown stuff at social networking, I'll pull my head in now.

[Kal]

Depends on your settings. I only allow people I have directly selected as friends to see my wall or my photo's, not even friends of friends can see it. This setting, can of course be changed to allow friends of friends to see, or to be completely open and allow anyone to see.

One thing I agree on is that in general it is like a virus, so many idiots just repost crap thinking it is true.

[tlgerdes]

Maybe you need facebook to find some friends. :lol: There are many anonymous people on there that go searching for souls that dont have friends.:question:

I have a policy with those social media sites, I will accept your friendship but I will not ask for it. I just collect friends :D

My kids havent found it yet they are too young, but our policy is the computer stays in the loungeroom, no hidden access.

[jjjnettie]

My kids are allowed to use FB. But they don't go on it much.
I like that I can keep an eye on them from my computer and yes I have pulled them up on occasion.

[mangrovedutch]

At my place it is a priviledge that is earned and lost. I expect respect from my kids which includes 100% honesty and they know that if the tow the line, do their work and are respectful that I will give them the same in return and that includes access to what now is a normal form of communication for their generation. I let them go for about an hour and call it quits. I've never heard a moan from them yet.
As parents we have a duty to teach, lead and encourage respect, boundaries and priviledges. I can be a Dad as well as a friend and it is working for me. My answer is No, you shouldn't ban them, control them.

I remember when mobiles came out, and come hell or high water, I was never ever getting one. Since then it has become an essential tool in our day to day lives, and I am sure that I have paid for many a Telstra executive's holiday. They call it progress :question:, unfortunately, but I can't stop it.

Ol' Fuddy Duddy Dutch

[michaellxv]

Banning it is not the answer. Supervision and education is the answer. This applies to adults as well as children, i've seen stuff posted by adults that really make to wonder.

My kids haven't really asked yet, although I have more or less said no. But if they really wanted it we would talk about it and probably allow it.

[mswhin63]

My wife uses FB, and from my wifes XP she occasionally sees pornographic content on site. There is no regulation and anything put on will take a while to remove. The bigger the site the worse it gets.

Really important a site that easily contain child abuse or other normally prohibited blogs, and other despicable acts need regulation. Site need rating as does DVD's we purchase or rent and any site should be regulated in the same manner.

Can you image your children able to retrieve "R" rated DVD's without your consent. That is the current state of the internet. No management software is perfect either.

[michaellxv]

Which is why supervision is required for ALL Internet use. The Internet is not about to go away so we need to teach kids to use it responsibly. No different to making any life choices really.

[Waxing_Gibbous]

If you ban them, who am I going to make fun of ???

[rally]

Banning - its like prohibition !

On this basis
- Playground and Schools are places where bullying and the exchange of unsavoury information occurs - not sure if we should simply ban them both or just ban our kids from going there ?

- The internet is clearly an evil place, between Web pages and email - Porn at ever corner, scam emails, pirated software, MA15+++ sites, shady sites, rip offs and cons in the form of fraudulent shopping sites, Bots that collect your personal info, viruses, trojans and worms
So Yep - better Ban the internet

Noticed JB HiFi and Harvey Norman have some very mature DVDs and some very offensive CDs, my kids can walk past them all and read the covers - better ban all shops that sell this adult stuff and while we are at it ban the R rated bands, movie makers and maybe we should ban the medium all together - yes no more CDs DVDs, BRs that'll do it

Oh my goodness - went into the newsagent and there wrapped in plastic were some porn mags next to S&T - thats it, ban the newsagents and the porn mags - my kids could easily be offended.

Now they are safe !?

Well nearly - just realised the TV is playing a lot of MA+ movies after 8.30 and my kids can use the TV controller.
They show us quick flicks and crops of the gruesome scenes of CSI etc in ads during family evening viewing time every day - surely that shouldn't be right.

When I think about it - electricity is the real problem - if we ban electricity we would be safe from all of this - wouldn't we ?
Plus we already know its very dangerous.
And bikes and pools, and Playstation and even the Wii . . .

Supervision, a bit of regulation, education, common sense, love and caring and offering quality alternatives seems like a more balanced way of dealing with the world we live in.

My sarcasm on the matter !

[multiweb]

The internet is a place where anonimity reigns but it is merely a mirror image of our society. As long as anyone will be able to go online without a clear trace whether it is a dedicated IP or unique assigned login or any other mean of identification it won't change. Maybe one day we will be able to have everyone online acountable for their actions or at least know who's who. Then the internet will become the formidable tool that it's always meant to be. Sharing resources and knowlegde without the (unknown) riff raff.

[casstony]

You softies are getting too hung up on the word 'banning'.

If there's something I don't want my kids to have access to until a certain age, then they don't get it. As a parent it's ok to say 'no'.

Anyway, as of now meanies rule 17 to 16 in favour of blowing up Facebook :) . Who's in favour of blowing up DS's, playstations and mobile phones too?

[supernova1965]

Are we starting name calling now:P you can't put the GENIE back in the bottle and in all reality do we really want to. There is a name for anti anything new what was that word again I think it came from this guy NED LUDD:rofl:

[casstony]

I'll plow my fields and milk my cows if I want to :)

A perfect example of what's good for kids:

Yesterday my 11yo daughter had a bad day at school from being teased - she was in a foul/teary mood when I picked her up.
At 5.30 I took her to Tae Kwon Do where she got to muck around with a different bunch of kids before class; during class she was selected to demonstrate the flying side kick because she's the best at that, which boosted her ego, and flying through the air doing the Bruce Lee thing then smacking into a pad is great for getting rid of aggression. When we got home she bounced into the house all smiles.

Filling the kids time with Face to face socializing with different groups of kids built around healthy activities is far better than electronic communication and games. They learn to socialize properly, they get fit, they learn new skills and they end up happier.

Tonight they go swimming with another group of friends (and go to Macdonalds afterwards) Macdonalds should be banned too.

[mangrovedutch]

:thumbsup: :P

[Jen]

:rolleyes: oh dont get me started on facebook :help:
I am a facebook user and it does has its pros and cons :rolleyes:
Its what these kids put on there sometimes way too much information :shrug: i have had to pull my 15 year old daughter up on way too many occasions on the rubbish she posts is very upsetting to see as a mother :sadeyes: i thought i raised her much better than that and yes she has been bullied on there too :mad2: Which i had to attend to :mad2: Then i noticed she even had her mobile number on there :eyepop: i can only image what sort of people she has be in touch with :sadeyes: And now i have a new thing to deal with i found out last night she has a 22 year old boyfriend which she met through facebook :( help i just dont know what to do with her now :question:
If we ban them from facebook there is plenty of other ways on the net to socialise anyway :screwy:
Not a happy jen today :sadeyes:

[TrevorW]

22 yo better warn her that he could go to jail as she is under the age of consent.

Jen this is a typical example of what can happen because of Facebook.

In the good old days if we wanted to socialise we had friends we met at school we talked, played music, danced, got involved in sports, played pinball or pool, rode our bikes, made up games and by 15 a lot of us worked, paid board, went to the pub, met nice girls, got married and settled down.

Graffiti, vandalism, illegal drugs, anti social behaviour etc were not the norm.

As families strive to get more and more we often neglect the fundamental things in life that bind us togethor.

We didn't need mobile phones, email, computers etc to have fun we used our brains and our bodies.

These issues and others are why these types of chat rooms and social networks should be curtailed as should mobile phones etc

[OzRob]

I think it is up to patents to educate and control their children's access to the internet. That said Facebook is a dangerous place even for adults. People put too much personal information on it, IMO.

[supernova1965]

I agree that people put too much personal stuff on FB but that is their fault not FB's we all in the end can think for ourself about what we want the world to know about us

[marki]

If you ban face book you will have to take away their mobile phones and from my experience you will not get parental support on that one. Education is the key and the college I teach at hires cyber saftey experts to come in and talk to the kids about the pitt falls and dangers associated with the net (cyber bullying, self endangerment, sexting etc etc). At one session the presenter was going through facebook hazards and a young girl was being pretty vocal about what she was saying. less then a minute later based on the info she had given on her FB wall, the presenter had her house firmly in the crosshairs of Google Earth which made all of the kids sit up and listen. I bet there were a lot of FB pages updated that night :lol:.

Cheers

[casstony]

Perhaps a warning to him might scare him off.

[Jen]

:rolleyes: Oh i was limiting my daughters internet access and i do educate her of the dangers etc of whats out there in the big wide web but we cant watch them 24/7 they now can get on facebook for free on their mobiles :bashcomp:

[Telescopeman54]

As much as I agree that it should be done, it will never happen. Even so, kids are smart enough to get right by it.

Personally, I'd prefer to ban Face Book totally! I cannot believe how addicted people have become to that thing! I actually have two accounts. One is for my business and I rarely do anything with it. I do post some odd ball news notes about astronomy, but, that's all. I think I may have sent three or four "messages" to people through it. As for my personal account, I find it so useless that I am quite ready to delete it.

CS

Steve

[supernova1965]

And none of us are addicted to IIS are we :P:rofl: should we ban that also:sadeyes:

[Jen]

:eyepop: noooooooooooooooooooooooooo never............... :scared3:

[stattonb]

i think there should be a age limit for facebook i will in no way let me daughter or son jump on there before they are 13 years old and aslong as i can monitor it.

[OzRob]

I was just talking generally and not in relation to your daughter's situation...:)

[PCH]

Without appearing disagreeable, I'd be interested to hear exactly how you plan to monitor it.

I don't use it, so I'm not trying to sound flippant. But my kids do, and as I understand it, you can't get transcripts emailed to you or otherwise saved.

So how will you monitor it?

If you plan on hovering over your child while they type that heiroglyphical plop they call conversation, you're going to be the world's biggest pooper. You also may need a lot of patience. Also, as soon as you're not watching, their conversation content will change from Mother Teresa to regular teen stuff instantly. So, as for monitoring, - if anyone can tell me how, I'd be really interested to hear how. :thumbsup:

[supernova1965]

The way I see it and I don't have kids but I think this is valid but if your kids think they have to hide things from you that is where you will run into problems but if they think they can confide in you and tell you anything then you wont have to be standing over their shoulder because you will know what and who they are talking to.:question:

[PCH]

Hmmm - where to start :help:

I'm afraid the real world with kids isn't quite as nice and straightforward as that Warren. The only thing you can safely assume is that they will only tell you what they want you to know, and that they are happy to lie through their teeth, whilst looking like angels, whenever it suits them. I wish you did have kids - then you'd know that what I'm saying is the truth. Sorry to disillusion you :P

[Zaps]

Within a year or two facebook will be as defunct and forgotten as the once-mighty myspace and bebo, et al.

There's always another Next Big Thing just around the corner.

[multiweb]

I don't think so. Follow the money trail. Socialising networks are here to stay because they're a fantastic tool to collect data and do trending on their users. That alone is marketing gold. FB, Twitter, whatever comes in the future are now set standards adopted by the big retail companies and even some banks now. Believe it or not ING has a facebook page now for customers promotions and rewards! :shrug: Mixing secure banking and hacked socialising networking ... nice... :rolleyes:

Reading all the posts below there is something that keeps coming up. Lack of control about what for, where from and when kids access the networks and who they talk to. Just forget about the kids. You can extend this line of thinking to any online user. The whole industry needs to be revolutionised at the ISP level. Nobody should be allowed to connect anonimously.

A static IP could be enforced across the board. Then the way you behave online is transparent and it is also the way you behave in real life and everything you say can be traced back to you. You are accountable for your actions just like in real life. Sure, some people will scream privacy laws but hey, good people have nothing to hide. :)

I don't go in the streets abusing people or trying to break in their houses or filling up their mailboxes with 2 tones of viagra printouts. I'd be in jail. But it's happening all the time in cyberspace. :P

[Zaps]

That's what people said about myspace, bebo, et al.

[multiweb]

Well my point was that while myspace & bebo might be on the back burner now, FB and twitter are doing real good. Names are irrelevant. The concept will evolve, be rebranded and is here to say IMHO.

[Zaps]

And my point was that "facebook" will fade away, just as myspace and the others did and have, because something "new" and "different" will appear on the scene. Only it won't really be new or different.

[multiweb]

...

[Octane]

I see your snake and raise you...

H

[KenGee]

yep no good can come from social networking sites like FB, Myspace and IIS...no wait.....

Didn't they say rock music would be the end of western civilization?

[Zaps]

It's not so much a case of "no good" coming from their use as it is "nothing important or worthwhile or lasting". Aside from the odd case of it being utilized to partly assist in important things (Egypt's recent "revolution"), facebook and similar sites are basically just fads enabling teenage girls to trade gossip and have no lasting or intrinsic value of any other kind.

[iceman]

How long have you been a member of Facebook?

How long have you spent using Facebook?

[asimov]

Well I was an avid FB member at one stage, but I got bored with some of the pure rubbish that was being posted by my younger members on my friends list. If I want to know what you had for tea, or how many boys are busy chatting you up right now online, I'll ask:lol:

As for the topic heading - I'm about to ban FB on the router, we have a 12 yr old girl here that thinks she knows it all, & has repeatedly denied all requests to spend less time on FB & do her damned homework & chores. It's punishment time:D

[casstony]

Geez, bit harsh :thumbsup:. If she behaves herself maybe give her a second chance............when she's 25?

I remember a Bill Cosby line regarding teenagers - "the only time in their life a 13yo will know more is when they're 14, 15 and 16yo".

[jjjnettie]

It all depends on how you use FB.
Most of my online "friends" are astronomers, amateur and professional.
I love it when JPL, NASA or SDO etc, posts images or releases info that is hot off the press. Getting the straight facts before some journo adds their idea of science to the mix.
To me FB is a valuable resource, I won't be quitting it any time soon.

[astroron]

I am a FB user and have caught up with number of friends over the last few years.
I am not a fan of banning everything I don't like which to me is the easy way out.
If you think your children are at risk then it is your job as a parent to educate them and guide them and protect them.
I am sure a good percentage of the people who advocate banning FB would have rebelled against something when they where young which their parents didn't want them to watch or do.

[TrevorW]

Well not that simple if the Govt decides otherwise it will be banned.

Case to point

The State Govt here has banned children under the age of 18 from getting body piecings unless they have written parental consent

and under 16 altogethor except ear piecing which will still require written parental consent

[astroron]

I think you have a "Snow balls chance in hell" of getting children banned from using Face Book:rolleyes:
It is a ridiculous notion :screwy:
who is going to police it:question::question::question::qu estion:
Cheers

[TrevorW]

The webs sites would be required to police it (facing fines for breaches etc) it would not be impossible just very difficult. Such control has happened in places around the world by Govt's

[Barrykgerdes]

The best way to make sure every kid gets onto face book is to ban it.:thumbsup::P
Banning never works. Even the drug culture became much worse when it was made illegal. Look at prohibition in the US. We would never have had Elliott Ness and the untouchables on TV.;);)

Like I said before make Face book liable for any havoc it causes. A few multimillion dollar awards will soon have it shutting down.:P:lol::lol:

Barry

[gman]

The question has been asked should FB be banned but the question I also want is why should it be banned?

There are privacy settings that can be enforced on FB accounts so only friends have access to your information.
I have told my kids that they are losing the art of actually talking to people face to face.

There are people who spill their guts on FB and offer too much info but as previously mentioned, it is just a mirror of society.
Whether the prowlers are on the streets or on FB, they are their.
I do however feel somewhat safer knowing that we are friends of our children on FB and can see everything posted.

I do personally find it boring and the kids will grow out of it when somthing new comes along.

[astroron]

Could you tell me a western country that bans children using face book:question:
even the Totalitarian states like China and others are having trouble controlling the internet:rolleyes:
If you want a big brother State which to me is what you are advocating, by trying to get stuff like this banned is where you are heading :shrug:.

[TrevorW]

I not advocating anything I asked a question because it was posed in the media

How far to you honestly think in someways we ae not that far off 1984

look whats happened in America since 9/11

Someone sent me this joke today but how far is it from the truth

If you can't afford a doctor, go to an airport - you'll get a free x-ray and a breast exam,
and; if you mention Al Qaeda, you'll get a free colonoscopy

[asimov]

Nah, I'll lift the ban if she can face up to (only a handfull) of her after school responsibilities. I won't go into details, but this lil' gal has had very little 'ethical upbringing' as the biological father took off years ago. She is one of 7 kids though so I reckon I have my work cut out for me;):lol: