Scratch

scratch_yoshi wrote:

I'd like to object!
I still believe this is unfair, and it will be for another 3 and a half years!

This is exactly what I mean
I assume this person is 3 and a half years away from being 14
As soon as he is 14, though, it will become fair suddenly?

......
You're sure taking this well.
There's no way to deal with bias, there's no flame war, and the rule is unfair
Many people under 14 would make good moderators, but the recent spammer activity has convinced the Scratch team not to take any chances with the younger members. It's fair and not fair at the same time, if that makes any sense. It all depends on how you look at it. And lastly, why would I call you biased? You don't really add much to the discussion, just restate the same questions time after time, so I have no grounds for that

Blade-Edge wrote:

scratch_yoshi wrote:

I'd like to object!
I still believe this is unfair, and it will be for another 3 and a half years!

This is exactly what I mean
I assume this person is 3 and a half years away from being 14
As soon as he is 14, though, it will become fair suddenly?

I was gonna say that exact point, but was too lazy.

Just like me. No one knows my real age because I lie all the time
Lasy year I said I was 16, but this year I said I was 17
See what a liar I am
I can't even keep my story straight

soupoftomato wrote:

Blade-Edge wrote:

scratch_yoshi wrote:

I'd like to object!
I still believe this is unfair, and it will be for another 3 and a half years!

This is exactly what I mean
I assume this person is 3 and a half years away from being 14
As soon as he is 14, though, it will become fair suddenly?

I was gonna say that exact point, but was too lazy.

scratch_yoshi wrote:

*facepalm*
Well... I didn't mean that! I guess I was just upset about it then(yesterday  ), but now I think it's completley... fair. With all of the spam, p0rn, cussing, and other stuff, I feel that 14 is just right. 

cheddargirl wrote:

juststickman wrote:

The thing is, if you didn't say your real age, nobody would know...

That is why the Scratch Team now requires parent's permission for those wanting to run - they want to talk to the parents to make sure they [the parents] are okay with their child taking on the role of moderator.

Does that mean all of the current mods, not only the ones running for the election, need to have the Scratch Team get your parents permission?

EDIT: Also, perhaps, instead of having an age limit, you could just require parent's permission instead?

Last edited by Lucario621 (2010-10-01 17:46:02)

TheSaint wrote:

The second is from Middle School to High school. Work significantly increases. From less than an hour of homework to several. Also, social pressurese start to build with sports, clubs and classes. In high school there are alot more choices, but with them comes much more difficulty. You have to balance social life, sports, school, and free time.

I disagree. My brother is in highschool, and he has less homework, because instead of 7 classes a day, there is 4, so there is more class time...

But it could vary from school to school.

cheddargirl wrote:

juststickman wrote:

The thing is, if you didn't say your real age, nobody would know...

That is why the Scratch Team now requires parent's permission for those wanting to run - they want to talk to the parents to make sure they [the parents] are okay with their child taking on the role of moderator.

So, the Scratch Team is actually going to call or email our parents or something? 

Lucario621 wrote:

cheddargirl wrote:

juststickman wrote:

The thing is, if you didn't say your real age, nobody would know...

That is why the Scratch Team now requires parent's permission for those wanting to run - they want to talk to the parents to make sure they [the parents] are okay with their child taking on the role of moderator.

Does that mean all of the current mods, not only the ones running for the election, need to have the Scratch Team get your parents permission?

That is something the Scratch Team is actively discussing regarding the mods who are currently 14 or older.

EDIT: Also, perhaps, instead of having an age limit, you could just require parent's permission instead?

The Scratch Team is aware that there are under under 14 years of age who are mature enough and have the potential to be moderator, but they are rather uncomfortable with them doing so, even with parental permissions. At this point, the age limit restriction is unlikely to change.

Lucario621 wrote:

cheddargirl wrote:

Lucario621 wrote:

Does that mean all of the current mods, not only the ones running for the election, need to have the Scratch Team get your parents permission?

That is something the Scratch Team is actively discussing regarding the mods who are currently 14 or older.

I see...

cheddargirl wrote:

EDIT: Also, perhaps, instead of having an age limit, you could just require parent's permission instead?

The Scratch Team is aware that there are under under 14 years of age who are mature enough and have the potential to be moderator, but they are rather uncomfortable with them doing so, even with parental permissions.

I see - especially with your detailed explanation.

My question though is; despite all of the facts about maturity and age and such that you have been mentioning, which is mostly true, what is your main reason for doing this? What problems are there with the current mods that are under 14 years old that caused the Scratch Team to remove them? After all, if the Scratch Team didn't have any problems with them, they wouldn't remove them, correct?

The Scratch Team wasn't comfortable with those younger than 14 having to deal with some of the issues the moderators have to face on a more frequent basis than regular members, such as the cussing words, browser exploits, and pornographic content that has to be removed from the website (Theoretical example: suppose there are five reports of inappropriate content on the website, each made by one user; for this we can assume that each user has to deal with such a thing once and only once - a moderator will have to deal with it five times. Now imagine a moderator having to deal with it almost everyday), hence why the other two members are currently being removed from the moderating staff until they are older.

(EDIT:) Were there perhaps any complaints from parents from one of the moderators which changed the Scratch Team's opinion?

None that I am aware of [I'm not a Scratch Team member]. To my understanding of the issue, it more or less has to do with some of the content that appeared during over the summer, and the Scratch Team was not comfortable with having moderators of younger age having to deal with them.

Last edited by cheddargirl (2010-10-01 18:48:21)

cheddargirl wrote:

The Scratch Team wasn't comfortable with those younger than 14 having to deal with some of the issues the moderators have to face on a more frequent basis than regular members, such as the cussing words, browser exploits, and pornographic content that has to be removed from the website (Theoretical example: suppose there are five reports of inappropriate content on the website, each made by one user; for this we can assume that each user has to deal with such a thing once and only once - a moderator will have to deal with it five times. Now imagine a moderator having to deal with it almost everyday), hence why the other two members are currently being removed from the moderating staff until they are older.

It happens everyday? 

cheddargirl wrote:

Lucario621 wrote:

cheddargirl wrote:

Lucario621 wrote:

Does that mean all of the current mods, not only the ones running for the election, need to have the Scratch Team get your parents permission?

That is something the Scratch Team is actively discussing regarding the mods who are currently 14 or older.

I see...

cheddargirl wrote:

The Scratch Team is aware that there are under under 14 years of age who are mature enough and have the potential to be moderator, but they are rather uncomfortable with them doing so, even with parental permissions.

I see - especially with your detailed explanation.

My question though is; despite all of the facts about maturity and age and such that you have been mentioning, which is mostly true, what is your main reason for doing this? What problems are there with the current mods that are under 14 years old that caused the Scratch Team to remove them? After all, if the Scratch Team didn't have any problems with them, they wouldn't remove them, correct?

The Scratch Team wasn't comfortable with those younger than 14 having to deal with some of the issues the moderators have to face on a more frequent basis than regular members, such as the cussing words, browser exploits, and pornographic content that has to be removed from the website (Theoretical example: suppose there are five reports of inappropriate content on the website, each made by one user; for this we can assume that each user has to deal with such a thing once and only once - a moderator will have to deal with it five times. Now imagine a moderator having to deal with it almost everyday), hence why the other two members are currently being removed from the moderating staff until they are older.

(EDIT:) Were there perhaps any complaints from parents from one of the moderators which changed the Scratch Team's opinion?

None that I am aware of [I'm not a Scratch Team member]. To my understanding of the issue, it more or less has to do with some of the content that appeared during over the summer, and the Scratch Team was not comfortable with having moderators of younger age having to deal with them.

I see all of your reasons, but I do think the Scratch Team is overreacting.

Just search "kids swearing earlier" or google or another search engine, and you'll see a lot of information - even kids as young as 2 are swearing. And, swearing goes hand in hand with sexual topics as being reported on the Scratch Website. Now by that, I'm not saying that the Scratch Team should be more flexible with swearing and pornography on the Scratch website - but I do think they should be more flexible with the moderators.

Lucario621 wrote:

cheddargirl wrote:

Lucario621 wrote:

I see...

I see - especially with your detailed explanation.

My question though is; despite all of the facts about maturity and age and such that you have been mentioning, which is mostly true, what is your main reason for doing this? What problems are there with the current mods that are under 14 years old that caused the Scratch Team to remove them? After all, if the Scratch Team didn't have any problems with them, they wouldn't remove them, correct?

The Scratch Team wasn't comfortable with those younger than 14 having to deal with some of the issues the moderators have to face on a more frequent basis than regular members, such as the cussing words, browser exploits, and pornographic content that has to be removed from the website (Theoretical example: suppose there are five reports of inappropriate content on the website, each made by one user; for this we can assume that each user has to deal with such a thing once and only once - a moderator will have to deal with it five times. Now imagine a moderator having to deal with it almost everyday), hence why the other two members are currently being removed from the moderating staff until they are older.

(EDIT:) Were there perhaps any complaints from parents from one of the moderators which changed the Scratch Team's opinion?

None that I am aware of [I'm not a Scratch Team member]. To my understanding of the issue, it more or less has to do with some of the content that appeared during over the summer, and the Scratch Team was not comfortable with having moderators of younger age having to deal with them.

I see all of your reasons, but I do think the Scratch Team is overreacting.

Just search "kids swearing earlier" or google or another search engine, and you'll see a lot of information - even kids as young as 2 are swearing. And, swearing goes hand in hand with sexual topics as being reported on the Scratch Website. Now by that, I'm not saying that the Scratch Team should be more flexible with swearing and pornography on the Scratch website - but I do think they should be more flexible with the moderators.

Keeping in mind that the Scratch Team wants this site to be safe for all ages, I would assume they [the Scratch Team] wants to extend the same thinking towards their moderators - considering what moderators have to see and do, this can only be extended so far. My assumption is that this is probably likely why they implemented the new rule requiring moderators be age 14 or older, as it seems to be a fair compromise with regards with what moderators have to face and the values that the Scratch Team wants to implement to all Scratch members.