Age Ratings?

[JelZe GoldRabbit]

With Ninja back and messing up the Misc. forum again with another one of his topics, I just had to bring this up.

Two things have occured to me on the forums. First of all is the apparent tendency for some members (whose names are well-known) to have some issues with their... ehm, hormones, shall we call them. I see topics containing sexuality of all kinds in the Misc. forums. Not overwhelming, but a large enough number to be noticable. Nothing that can stop them, because of the second thing I've noticed: the lack of a discrete age rating.

I want to talk about the second thing for a moment. You all know I have issues with sexuality out in the open, I even admit that. Some of you have seen me reacting fiercely on #jj2. And if there's one there are others out there. I just have the statement that if something is not suitable for a "kids game" like JJ2, including drugs, provocing the comsumption alcohol and sex, should be kept away from the general areas and sealed off. Other sites I visit do things like that, so why can't J2O?

I know banning any discussions of the possible objective matters won't solve anything, but at least a forum or a part of the site can be created for just that purpose. Like dividing the site into a G or PG rating area and one with PG-13 and above. The provider doesn't allow explicit discussions, so that could be covered... Or just give the site a PG rating and be done with it.

- JelZe GoldRabbit =:3

[Stijn]

See it from the other side. I have no problems with others talking about sexuality in public. And there are probably others like me here.

[Link]

The only forum where this is really an issue is Miscellaneous Stuff. I would not support creating a separate PG-13/R/etc. forum, because it would concentrate and promote more such threads, rather than keeping a healthy mix as Misc does. But because this forum is for the community of a children's game, some people might expect content to be more restricted than it is.

The only thing that would, in my opinion, be appropriate would be a warning or disclaimer on the Misc forum description (like "Not all content may be suitable for children"). It's my opinion that the community members and their desires are more important to rules and policy than hypothetical child visitors. Even a disclaimer might be unnecessary if the forum rules are publicly posted, as some are now.

The web host does not prohibit explicit discussion. They allow virtually anything as long as it is legal, as most pay providers do. All additional restrictions are set by the forum and site administrators.

This poll gave some relevant public opinion. A minority of respondents supported a difference in restrictions between Jazz and non-Jazz related forums, while a majority supported fewer restrictions on sex-related discussion.

[Torkell]

Perhaps require such threads to have a warning message in the title?

[LittleFreak]

The only thing that would, in my opinion, be appropriate would be a warning or disclaimer on the Misc forum description (like "Not all content may be suitable for children").

That would make misc look like there would be only adult topics in there. =P

Perhaps require such threads to have a warning message in the title?

That won't really solve the problem imo. If someone like Jelze doesn't like sexuality-related discussion (which I accept, it's not for everyone), seeing a "This thread contains SEX!" won't make him feel better either.

[MSB3000]

i agree with Link

[Violet CLM]

Would you also be opposed to discussion of such subjects as breeding, animal mating, pregnancy, menstruation, birth, breastfeeding, early childhood education, hugging and kissing, JelZe? I am not attemping to insult you, I am curious about this.

[MaGoo]

It seems that the severe minority of our members would like a stop to certain misc topics. You can't please everybody, so you might as well please the majority. I say keep things the way they are.

Oh, and I don't see any reason to why you should single out Ninja the way you just did. He is not the only one creating "objectionable" topics.

[Radium]

It's usually easy enough to tell the offensive topics. "Can hermaphrodites get themselves pregnant?" is more likely to be offensive than "What Star Wars movies have you seen?", for instance.

[Risp_old]

How would you expect a hypothetical child JCF'er to know what a hermaphrodite is?

[Radium]

How would you expect a hypothetical child JCF'er to know what a hermaphrodite is?
It's okay then because they won't understand anything in the thread.

[MSB3000]

and then they would go around saying "things" to everyone.

[Radium]

and then they would go around saying "things" to everyone.
Their childlike innocence will protect them from doing any actual harm to their reputation.

[Blackraptor]

do we even have any children visiting this forum?

[Stijn]

No, but there's always a chance one will visit it!

Unless you count Ninjajazz as a kid. Oh wait, he's banned. \o/

[Ninja]

We have kids visiting the forum, Blacky, but none who would be offended by this kind of stuff.

JelZe, bro... if you're offended by this kind of stuff, just don't look at it man. I'm sorry if you're offended by that topic, but there wasn't really anything offensive about it. Unless you're offended by sexual discussions, which in that case, is you and not the majority of the forum. You can't just ban sexual threads because one person is offended by it and the majority is cool with it.

[LittleFreak]

We have kids visiting the forum, Blacky, but none who would be offended by this kind of stuff.

JelZe, bro... if you're offended by this kind of stuff, just don't look at it man. I'm sorry if you're offended by that topic, but there wasn't really anything offensive about it. Unless you're offended by sexual discussions, which in that case, is you and not the majority of the forum. You can't just ban sexual threads because one person is offended by it and the majority is cool with it.

Jelze never said sex topics should be banned, he just asked about a system that divides adult/teenager topics with "unharmful" ones.

If I was him I would just try not to look at those topics though, like you said.

[Ẅŗåïţħ]

Why not just make a little icon like the poll icons to tell whether there's explicit stuff in it or not?

[LittleFreak]

Why not just make a little icon like the poll icons to tell whether there's explicit stuff in it or not?

Good idea.

[CrimiClown]

See it from the other side. I have no problems with others talking about sexuality in public. And there are probably others like me here.

Agreed.

Why not just make a little icon like the poll icons to tell whether there's explicit stuff in it or not?

Also agreed.

[Trafton]

What defines explicit? One man's innocent religious joke is another man's (-)able affront to his God. (EDIT: the filtered word means "send to hell")

We need to establish set guidelines before jumping into the realm of something as generic as "explicit topics get marked accordingly."

[White Rabbit]

I think the forum is currently operating on a 'common sense' basis, and that goes for both sides. The offender should just apologize and the offended forgive.

I also think users should themselves be able to mark their threads, rather than have to trust the judgement of mods and admins.

[Link]

I think a voluntary thread icon is a good idea, as White Rabbit suggested. For reasons Trafton mentioned, I don't yet think we're at a stage to have administrators and moderators decide age ratings for threads.

All the same rules would apply, but as a courtesy, people posting potentially offensive or sexually-related threads could choose a '14+' icon or whatever it ends up being.

[Tubz]

Don't visit the trash threads then.

[Nitro]

You all know I have issues with sexuality out in the open
what issues? solve them, get over them, what's your problem with sex exactly?