Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (49384)	6/7/2002 2:20:46 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"I think I did respond exactly in context. I am not seeking to exaggerate your position or to say that you are being extreme on this issue, but rather I am disagreeing with the non extreme position you are taking." Here is the specific statement I made regarding the "feds" in the post you responded to: "Back to the "feds." I do not think the idea of congressional legislation designed to promote safety for children participating on the internet should be simply dismissed. I also do not think Libraries should be the target of such legislation. For example: It would not be a big leap to extend measures designed to protect individuals in 3D interaction to electronic interaction. This would not IMO limit anyone's freedoms and would provide a framework for state and local organizations (including libraries), as well as individuals, to act in a safe and responsible manner." You say you read it, and later say you re-read it. I fail to see how your criticism is in context. In earlier posts kholt had been harping on the feds and library interventions. I had responded to her because I have a problem with the lack of responsibility shown by public libraries. Maybe this is what you were thinking of. The comment that education of children is all that is needed to insure safe and responsible participation is inanely offensive to me. If libraries are going to offer and in many cases promote unrestricted internet use then they need to assume responsibility for their patrons who participate. If they offered a free unrestricted wet bar we would hold them responsible when children behaved irresponsible, educated or not. There are regulations that prohibit this as well. All that I am suggesting is to have the same types of safegaurds for children on the internet as we provide for them in 3D. I am not and have not specified that the "feds" are "the" solution to anything.