May I ask what this is a reference to?

http://www.bzpower.com/forum/index.php?aut...1#comment347331

I think he meant over protective.

lol, just figure out his point don't freak out and put words in his mouth. xD

obviously his point was NOT to not take care of children and to kill them all.. :/

I get his point. His point is like whaaaaaaaat.

good, I'm really glad you're not as stupid as it looked. ;P (With all due respect..)

I agree, the point is retarded, and you staffers are human (I hope ;P) but like really, WHY ALL THE DRAMA? xD

please, take care of the kiddos on the site. thanks. lol

So let me get this straight, people think keeping children safe is a bad thing?

Of course. That line of thinking has been popular for awhile.

So let me get this straight, people think keeping children safe is a bad thing?

 

Of course. That line of thinking has been popular for awhile.

qft

You're not THE CHILDREN! all the time, sometimes you THE CHILDREN! very well when it's called for. But a lot of times you just THE CHILDREN! over DROPPED MY ICECREAM.

I hope I'm being clear.

@Cags - That doesn't mean that BZP is the proper place to introduce said things, and it also isn't our job as staff to introduce those either. It is the parent's job to set out what their child is exposed to. Our job is to be a fun, informative, child-friendly environment. Not a teen-trend environment, not an open-adult-environment. Keeping children safe and letting them have good, honest, clean fun is more important than allowing things which they could learn later on in life.

Think of it from the perspective of a parent.

-Nikira

@Cags - That doesn't mean that BZP is the proper place to introduce said things, and it also isn't our job as staff to introduce those either. It is the parent's job to set out what their child is exposed to. Our job is to be a fun, informative, child-friendly environment. Not a teen-trend environment, not an open-adult-environment. Keeping children safe and letting them have good, honest, clean fun is more important than allowing things which they could learn later on in life.

 

Think of it from the perspective of a parent.

 

-Nikira

I don't think that's what ANYONE is taking issue with. o_____o where you got that, I have no idea.

I think that what's going on is some of the rules we have are exasperating people. Not the good rules, but the stupid rules. (the rules we have for really the must retarded reasons, take leet for example...lol)

We all understand that BZP is meant for good clean fun, and I think that's ALL we want, we don't want to be on a junky forum. We just want logic.

also, in no way did I mean to offend anyone through this post, I'm just being honest.

@Cags - That doesn't mean that BZP is the proper place to introduce said things, and it also isn't our job as staff to introduce those either. It is the parent's job to set out what their child is exposed to. Our job is to be a fun, informative, child-friendly environment. Not a teen-trend environment, not an open-adult-environment. Keeping children safe and letting them have good, honest, clean fun is more important than allowing things which they could learn later on in life.

 

Think of it from the perspective of a parent.

 

-Nikira

I don't think that's what ANYONE is taking issue with. o_____o where you got that, I have no idea.

 

I think that what's going on is some of the rules we have are exasperating people. Not the good rules, but the stupid rules. (the rules we have for really the must retarded reasons, take leet for example...lol)

 

We all understand that BZP is meant for good clean fun, and I think that's ALL we want, we don't want to be on a junky forum. We just want logic.

 

also, in no way did I mean to offend anyone through this post, I'm just being honest.

Na, just responding to Cag's "sheltered kids" note. Even if that's not the entire context, it's sorta not our choice to decide stuff like that about what kids do or don't see (this applies for many of the rules that memebrs consider "stupid", ex. the no outside forum/blog/chatroom rule). Better to play it safe than to have angry emails (or worse) from parents and guardians, after all. =\

As far as the leet - just think for a second: what is more logical, encouraging posting in coherent words or having to dig through posts and posts of incomprehensible sentences?

-Nikira

@Cags - That doesn't mean that BZP is the proper place to introduce said things, and it also isn't our job as staff to introduce those either. It is the parent's job to set out what their child is exposed to. Our job is to be a fun, informative, child-friendly environment. Not a teen-trend environment, not an open-adult-environment. Keeping children safe and letting them have good, honest, clean fun is more important than allowing things which they could learn later on in life.

 

Think of it from the perspective of a parent.

 

-Nikira

I don't think that's what ANYONE is taking issue with. o_____o where you got that, I have no idea.

 

I think that what's going on is some of the rules we have are exasperating people. Not the good rules, but the stupid rules. (the rules we have for really the must retarded reasons, take leet for example...lol)

 

We all understand that BZP is meant for good clean fun, and I think that's ALL we want, we don't want to be on a junky forum. We just want logic.

 

also, in no way did I mean to offend anyone through this post, I'm just being honest.

 

Na, just responding to Cag's "sheltered kids" note. Even if that's not the entire context, it's sorta not our choice to decide stuff like that about what kids do or don't see (this applies for many of the rules that memebrs consider "stupid", ex. the no outside forum/blog/chatroom rule). Better to play it safe than to have angry emails (or worse) from parents and guardians, after all. =\

 

As far as the leet - just think for a second: what is more logical, encouraging posting in coherent words or having to dig through posts and posts of incomprehensible sentences?

 

-Nikira

I wasn't suggesting that BZP Staff allows anything inappropriate, fyi, I'm totally against that.

honestly, it's really not that hard to read through leet, and it really shouldn't be made that big of a deal. xD

@Cags - That doesn't mean that BZP is the proper place to introduce said things, and it also isn't our job as staff to introduce those either. It is the parent's job to set out what their child is exposed to. Our job is to be a fun, informative, child-friendly environment. Not a teen-trend environment, not an open-adult-environment. Keeping children safe and letting them have good, honest, clean fun is more important than allowing things which they could learn later on in life.

 

Think of it from the perspective of a parent.

 

-Nikira

I don't think that's what ANYONE is taking issue with. o_____o where you got that, I have no idea.

 

I think that what's going on is some of the rules we have are exasperating people. Not the good rules, but the stupid rules. (the rules we have for really the must retarded reasons, take leet for example...lol)

 

We all understand that BZP is meant for good clean fun, and I think that's ALL we want, we don't want to be on a junky forum. We just want logic.

 

also, in no way did I mean to offend anyone through this post, I'm just being honest.

 

Na, just responding to Cag's "sheltered kids" note. Even if that's not the entire context, it's sorta not our choice to decide stuff like that about what kids do or don't see (this applies for many of the rules that memebrs consider "stupid", ex. the no outside forum/blog/chatroom rule). Better to play it safe than to have angry emails (or worse) from parents and guardians, after all. =\

 

As far as the leet - just think for a second: what is more logical, encouraging posting in coherent words or having to dig through posts and posts of incomprehensible sentences?

 

-Nikira

I wasn't suggesting that BZP Staff allows anything inappropriate, fyi, I'm totally against that.

 

honestly, it's really not that hard to read through leet, and it really shouldn't be made that big of a deal. xD

Yup, I know you weren't. Again, the post was in response to Cags.

Ah, but that's you. I myself have a hard time reading anything other than basic leet, plus it's an absolute mess when it gets into larger posts. Yeah it's creative and it can look pretty dang neat when used correctly, but when it becomes nothing more than a spammy mess, that's not only annoying to a lot of members, but also a load on the staff to clean up and take care of.

Part of it is just deciding where to draw the line of allowing certain things or not, and I think that it just got to the point where the leet was getting out of hand enough to eliminate it entirely from the site, rather than having to continually shovel out the spammy stuff. *shrug* =\

-Nikira

Yeah, the thing about leet is that some people are very proficient in reading it and some aren't - I can read through the stuff just fine, for example, but plenty of people cannot.

In an ideal world, I'd like "light" leet to be allowed on BZP - you know, a 3 instead of an e here, an occasional 4 instead of an a there; who cares, right? And BZ originally was lax on leet like this. Unfortunately, members started abusing the concept, using leet to avoid the wordfilter, post inappropriate content, and so on. It eventually just got so out of hand that leet was just disallowed, and that has worked fine ever since.

Really I think it just comes down to asking yourself: is it really that bothersome to not post leet? Wouldn't you rather have leet disallowed than have people abusing it as they did in the past?

It's funny that it's always "the children!" around here but less then a quarter of BZPs active members are under 12.

by the time someones 12 they're almost always making stupid jokes about the kind of stuff they need protecting from.

It's funny that it's always "the children!" around here but less then a quarter of BZPs active members are under 12.

I don't know where you get that idea - BZPower's average ages gets lower every year. For every existing member that gets older each year, countless younger members join. The whining crowd rarely seems able to grasp they point that they are not indicative of the majority of the web site's population.

Maybe if you'd delete all the inactive users there could be a proper count of age ratio.

(and by inactive I mean any member with zero posts that's been here for more than, say, three or four years. because, despite how much the staff like to argue otherwise, there's not a huge chance of them posting after three or four years, especially if they never posted even once)

It's funny that it's always "the children!" around here but less then a quarter of BZPs active members are under 12.

I don't know where you get that idea - BZPower's average ages gets lower every year. For every existing member that gets older each year, countless younger members join. The whining crowd rarely seems able to grasp they point that they are not indicative of the majority of the web site's population.

What about the lower half of what I said that most kids in primary school make stupid jokes about the stuff you want to protect them from?

Maybe if you'd delete all the inactive users there could be a proper count of age ratio.

 

(and by inactive I mean any member with zero posts that's been here for more than, say, three or four years. because, despite how much the staff like to argue otherwise, there's not a huge chance of them posting after three or four years, especially if they never posted even once)

Do you really have to be condescending to staff everywhere you go on this site?

As for inactive users being delted, I still ask what do we stand to benefit from doing it? Yes, the possibility of the person coming back isn't extremely high, but it would also be an extreme time drain to go through and delete accounts that are inactive. It is, quite simply, a complete and total waste of time. We don't stand to gain anything by deleting accounts other than maybe freeing up names for the uncreative.

What about the lower half of what I said that most kids in primary school make stupid jokes about the stuff you want to protect them from?

Then they can do it at school, not here. All it takes is one parent who doesn't want their kid to see something they consider offensive to then turn around and start complaining to us. We aren't a site for a niche audience. We service a large crowd and often times when you service a larger group, you have to meet the needs of people from many different walks of life and sometimes that means taking the more "political correct" route to appeal to them while not alienating the rest of the audience. Most people can hold their tongue on BZP. I personally do, outside of the site I tell jokes many would consider inappropriate and I act in ways that would probably see me banned from this website, however I also understand that this site is not the place to act like that. If I'm with a group of people and one person doesn't like crude humor or "offensive" language, then I don't use it. It's the same principle here. Some people don't want to see that stuff so we appease them. It's an easier route to take then offending them because we don't offend people when we say you can't use certain language on the site.

Maybe if you'd delete all the inactive users there could be a proper count of age ratio.

 

(and by inactive I mean any member with zero posts that's been here for more than, say, three or four years. because, despite how much the staff like to argue otherwise, there's not a huge chance of them posting after three or four years, especially if they never posted even once)

Do you really have to be condescending to staff everywhere you go on this site?

 

As for inactive users being delted, I still ask what do we stand to benefit from doing it? Yes, the possibility of the person coming back isn't extremely high, but it would also be an extreme time drain to go through and delete accounts that are inactive. It is, quite simply, a complete and total waste of time. We don't stand to gain anything by deleting accounts other than maybe freeing up names for the uncreative.

not at all trying to be condescending, sorry.

And yeah, I realize it's not necessarily all that useful, I was just thinking that the age ratio would probably be different if it was only counting active members.

not at all trying to be condescending, sorry.

 

And yeah, I realize it's not necessarily all that useful, I was just thinking that the age ratio would probably be different if it was only counting active members.

But all the members that joined four years ago and have no posts would be four years older than when they joined so if you deleted them then the average age would go down rather than up...

So yeah that wouldn't help make BZP "older".

Also, Than, wouldn't deleted olde member accounts free up some handy space or something? Honestly I have no clue how these boards work. Even if it did free up space probably wouldn't be worth it...

~Bunda

Edit: this blog is about cags

hm