What's wrong with this for a start?



Rating description Equivalent
Safe For Kids G
General PG
14 Years PG-13
Mature R rated more or less
Restricted X rated

Examples:

There is nothing wrong with those tags - other than they already exist, but were kinda made obsolete when W3 went to the PICS label - which is why I stated earlier that the solution already exists - it just isnt used

Djilla, the problem stems from "label adult" as opposed to "label acceptable to children". The basic assumption is (incorrectly) that the WWW as a whole is safe for children, and only a few sites are "adult" in nature. In reality, most of the web in one form or another is not safe to be viewed by an 8 year old child.

Remember, adult doesn't mean porn, think of things like beer, wine, news, movies, chat rooms, discussions, blogs, video games... I could go on and on. Very very little of the internet is 100% safe for children. It should be for those people who want to make child safe content to register it as such and for browser manufactures to restrict access to those sites that permit children.

Forcing only adult sex sites to label and not requiring 100% of sites to label makes it a pointless exercise.

Alex

LOL
I'll never forget taking my 3 yr old to disney world back in 92 on a trip down here to Fl.
Some of the attractions were off limit cause of her age and height of course, but as Snow White and the 7 Dwarfs was one of her favorite Disney movies she just had to see that attraction. Seemed like an enjoyable ride for a lil one.

Well turns out the Seven Dwarfs ride was through their mine, dark and gloomy with the Wicked Witch cackling in the shadows then popping up everywheres causing cave ins on us and flames flaring up around us...timbers creaking, walls shifting...hell that ride even scared me a lil ;)

Well Little Jackie spent 90% of the ride on the cowering floor of the car between my feet. Hell when we got back up to Ma she made me throw out the Snow White video in the trash and as far as I know she has never watched anything to do with Snow White or the 7 Dwarves again...lol

We also still have a pic of our lil munchkin next to a Captain Hook 4 times her height with a terrified look of apprehension on her face.

Naw... I knew that I was just using the old metatag standard sort of as tongue in cheek. Meaning simple solution that could be implemented almost overnight if any of the big 3 SE's declared they wouldn't index any page without a rating and exclude altogether sites that abused the rating system. Who gets to decide question? My take has always been simple... rating for under seventeen over seventeen, over 21. Under seventeen No violence Period including cartoon shit, no sex Period! Over seventeen nothing graphic re: above, over 21 anything goes!

As usual RA I totally agree with you. I don't have kids, but if I did internet access would be almost unavailable as would the TV. I have lots of friends who monitor TV access quite easily and successfully. As is said in many other places Parents HAVE to be responsible.

Its in this note that the whole .kid domain thread is so relevant
http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/...ad.php?t=26857
because it would be nice to be able to easily filter access, especially to a buffet of reliable, informative, educational stuff for kids.

I think it would be really great if younger ones should be able to be guaranteed internet access without bullshit assaulting them including commerrcial stuff which in a lot of ways is just as offensive. Another note to a potential FSC offensive campaign... turn attention to outlawing marketing directly to minors on TV. |santa|

I concur.

I am with you Alex. If the parents want a safe place to let their kids loose on the net then they should make it. Make themselves a browser for kids. Make themselves a gateway and check and monitor all sites in there. There would be absolutely NO reason for anyone to put porn in their gateway unless they are completely stupid or evil as the assumption is that children do not have credit cards.

Preditors would have a reason to find their way in though and I am sure anyone that has proposed such a place knows that it is impossible to keep preditors out. The liability is what keeps anyone from making such a place. How cool would it be if it could be done?

Maybe another idea is to make a browser that facilitates a parents ability to make a kind of accepted sites list for their kids. So kid site webmasters can list themselves with this system. The parents can review the site and approve the site for their kids viewing. Maintenance by the parents (adding new sites all the time) would ensure a great experience for their kids. If a parent wants the net experience to be wide and vast they will put lots of time into their adding of sites. I find it impossible to find educational sites when my young teen kids come asking me to help them find something for their special projects at school. If I could narrow my search to trusted sites I have already included based on their merrit, it would be so much easier.

Infact you could sell "packs" of preapproved sites "educational" "for ages 8 and under" what ever. Little spin off cottage industry ha ha ha

Someone just has to do it. Build it and they will come.

Have you watched Shrek 2 ?? I was astonished at the inuendo and blatant mention of sexual topics. My daughter was 10 at the time and I had to constantly talk to her about the things mentioned because she WAS old enough to understand what they were talking about. Most everyone says "yeah but kids dont understand what that means" I think that isnt true. They understand the intent of teasing someone and that it was about something "naughty" and if they dont understand now they are getting close by movies pretending to be for kids clueing them in.