WINTER '07 – Brianfast for Minister of Discussion

Home Forums Governmental Forums Campaigns WINTER '07 – Brianfast for Minister of Discussion

This topic contains 66 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by Profile photo of Legoman182182 Legoman182182 7 years, 4 months ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 41 through 50 (of 67 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #356036
    Profile photo of Tim
    Tim
    Member

    Who cares about the rules? this is barely a children’s site. The majority of people who visit this site are at least 15.

    #356050
    Profile photo of Schlaeps
    Schlaeps
    Member

    I say we divide Brickfilms into three separate entities: BrickfilmsBabies (BrickBabies? BrickBabes?), Brickfilms Classic, and BF17+. Users would decided by age group of course.

    #356051
    Profile photo of Tim
    Tim
    Member

    BF17+ sounds like a movie rating for porn movies.

    No.

    #356072

    What an absolutely absurd, pompous, unfeasible and dam right idiotic approach to solving a problem which doesn’t really exist.

    “Aled” wrote: I actually agree with Tim.

    -Aled

    I though you where 12?

    Legoman.

    #356074
    Profile photo of Night Owl
    Night Owl
    Member

    It seems to like most sexual references come from pubescent kids, not older people.

    Anyway, I agree with Tim that younger kids probably should be reading a book (or learning to READ) before they get on the internet.
    However, seeing as we have no control over this, the best solution is to make room for them. You never know who’s going to turn out to be really good; there are some younger members who are quite mature (and some older ones who are anything but, for that matter).
    I’m against making the site “family-friendly”, but the rule about not posting inappropriate content should stay. Anatomical terms (when used in a relevant context), implicit sexual references (nudge, nudge) and mild profanity (damn, crap) are OK, but explicit sexual stuff is not.

    #356075
    Profile photo of Aled Owen
    Aled Owen
    Member

    “Legoman182182″ wrote: What an absolutely absurd, pompous, unfeasible and dam right idiotic approach to solving a problem which doesn’t really exist.

    [quote=”Aled”]I actually agree with Tim.

    -Aled

    I though you where 12?

    Legoman.[/quote]

    I’m 14 you idiot.

    -Aled

    #356084

    “Tim” wrote: The majority of people who visit this site are at least 15.

    Looks like you’d be packing your bags then. Tim the child catcher wants you out.

    #356090
    Profile photo of Night Owl
    Night Owl
    Member

    Please, let’s not turn this into a flame war, people.

    #356137
    Profile photo of Dragoon
    Dragoon
    Member

    dam right idiotic

    I think the term is “downright”, not “dam right”.

    So in technicality, there are rules against this, but they are not enforced.

    I think they are more or less enforced. If a mod sees someone use “the F-word”, it is deleted. Milder terms that any sane person would expect children to be exposed to are usually left undeleted. Except in the cases of very sheltered families, kids are usually inquisitive enough to be learning and seeing naughty words and sexual stuff in school and other places long before they see it here. I don’t really see any practical reason to prevent them from figuring that stuff out. Besides, a lot of kids are for some reason self-censoring so they will avoid anything overtly bad. I remember being that way.

    #356261
    Profile photo of Tim
    Tim
    Member

    “Legoman182182″ wrote: What an absolutely absurd, pompous, unfeasible and dam right idiotic approach to solving a problem which doesn’t really exist.

    [quote=”Aled”]I actually agree with Tim.

    -Aled

    I though you where 12?

    Legoman.[/quote]

    More like awesome. Stop being an annoying brit by using a loser-ish number of adjectives to sound legitimate. Get your point across, like good yanks would

    Unfeasible? Definitely not. Have you ever ran a phpbb forum? Probably not. Pompous? more like suitable. I don’t know how it’s both right and idiotic at the same time. A problem that doesn’t exist? Son do you get your eyes checked every once in a while? I wouldn’t be making my proposal if the problem didn’t exist. Too many useless threads on this forum, including “HOLY ASS THREE DAYS TILL CHRISTMAS!” thread and then the next day there would be a “HOLY ASS TWO DAYS TILL CHRISTMAS” thread.

    Looks like you’d be packing your bags then. Tim the child catcher wants you out.

    I didn’t say that I’d like to disallow people under 15 on the site. I said I would disallow people under 13.

    And people, don’t give me that “but Tim, they’ll lie about their age!” nonsense. No they won’t, you morons. Kids upon arrival won’t know about the age limit if there were one. They’ll come onto the forum with the perception “HEEHOOOO I AM 12 AND I HAVE NO PUBIC HAIR TIME TO GO TO THE FORUMS!!!!”, and they’ll have no idea about our age limit. It’s as simple as that. and then somehow we’ll make it that they won’t go back and change their age.

Viewing 10 posts - 41 through 50 (of 67 total)

The topic ‘WINTER '07 – Brianfast for Minister of Discussion’ is closed to new replies.