The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Because some of you can't stop bloody swearing!
BBC News
I think this is a great idea. Rather than let the parents watch their children, we should just review the whole internets and give each website a rating to protect their fragile little minds.
BBFC will charge £75 for each submission and then £6 for each page they have to review.
I think we can get a PG rating for GAD if we delete that thread with all the beheading videos.
--
Yeah, I saw that photo of Britney getting out of the car too. :(
BBC News
I think this is a great idea. Rather than let the parents watch their children, we should just review the whole internets and give each website a rating to protect their fragile little minds.
BBFC will charge £75 for each submission and then £6 for each page they have to review.
I think we can get a PG rating for GAD if we delete that thread with all the beheading videos.
--
A poll carried out by the children's charity in October suggested three out of four children had been disturbed by images they had seen on the internet. Yeah, I saw that photo of Britney getting out of the car too. :(
Haha this place isnt even a U. It makes Teletubbyland look like Iran.
Rated 12? I'm a 15 on my own.
Age ratings for the internet are even more useless than age ratings for games.
Age ratings for the internet are even more useless than age ratings for games.
pb wrote:
> Hah. Policing the internet? Good luck.
>
> The best way of protecting kids is to use the software on the pc
> rather than try to catagorise the whole internet.
What total (and mis-guided) crap from a MP with 'three young children' - usual heart-tugging quote that makes it more direct and relevant, 'yours sincerely folks a concerned parent' - you know the patter!
I'll go with your suggestion pb-it's always been there and is readily available. But I suppose the problem is always going to exist, because people aren't computer literate enough.
Many people/parents believe that they are computer literate because 'I use it at work' etc etc. Their home computer is a different matter - it's not controlled by company policies on downloading, file-sharing, misuse etc etc.
Many of the computers I 'fix' tend to be in this category - 'well I don't know who downloaded that funny picture + virus' etc etc. It's funny, but on home computers shared by the family, it's always the parents that blame one of the kids for the problem that I have to solve. The kids are usually more interested in downloading 'music' etc so 'drive-by' viruses are usually involved.
Having said that, the kids are usually more computer-savvy than their parents and are the ones who are more willing to listen to advice for their future surfing activities:-)
> Hah. Policing the internet? Good luck.
>
> The best way of protecting kids is to use the software on the pc
> rather than try to catagorise the whole internet.
What total (and mis-guided) crap from a MP with 'three young children' - usual heart-tugging quote that makes it more direct and relevant, 'yours sincerely folks a concerned parent' - you know the patter!
I'll go with your suggestion pb-it's always been there and is readily available. But I suppose the problem is always going to exist, because people aren't computer literate enough.
Many people/parents believe that they are computer literate because 'I use it at work' etc etc. Their home computer is a different matter - it's not controlled by company policies on downloading, file-sharing, misuse etc etc.
Many of the computers I 'fix' tend to be in this category - 'well I don't know who downloaded that funny picture + virus' etc etc. It's funny, but on home computers shared by the family, it's always the parents that blame one of the kids for the problem that I have to solve. The kids are usually more interested in downloading 'music' etc so 'drive-by' viruses are usually involved.
Having said that, the kids are usually more computer-savvy than their parents and are the ones who are more willing to listen to advice for their future surfing activities:-)
Utter crap. I don't think I'll give it the dignity of even commenting.
Hah. Policing the internet? Good luck.
The best way of protecting kids is to use the software on the pc rather than try to catagorise the whole internet.
The best way of protecting kids is to use the software on the pc rather than try to catagorise the whole internet.
Because some of you can't stop bloody swearing!
BBC News
I think this is a great idea. Rather than let the parents watch their children, we should just review the whole internets and give each website a rating to protect their fragile little minds.
BBFC will charge £75 for each submission and then £6 for each page they have to review.
I think we can get a PG rating for GAD if we delete that thread with all the beheading videos.
--
Yeah, I saw that photo of Britney getting out of the car too. :(
BBC News
I think this is a great idea. Rather than let the parents watch their children, we should just review the whole internets and give each website a rating to protect their fragile little minds.
BBFC will charge £75 for each submission and then £6 for each page they have to review.
I think we can get a PG rating for GAD if we delete that thread with all the beheading videos.
--
A poll carried out by the children's charity in October suggested three out of four children had been disturbed by images they had seen on the internet. Yeah, I saw that photo of Britney getting out of the car too. :(