this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
306 points (91.8% liked)
Games
16800 readers
680 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
People need to understand that the internet is a public space. Family PCs should be in a shared space like the living room and kids need to have parental controls enabled on their smart phone. Beyond that, yeah people need to get thicker skins when it comes to social media (including steam in this).
Strong disagree on parental controls. As a parent, if I don't trust my kids, they won't get a device. Period. If I trust them, they will get a device without any limitations. Period.
I really don't see the point in parental controls, all it does is encourage kids to learn how to get around parental controls. Instead of that, teach kids what it takes to earn your trust and go that route.
I'm a parent, and here are my only controls:
We do no internet filters, no enforced time limits (they have their own timers though), and no locks on specific programs. Either I trust them with everything or nothing. They know what they're allowed to use, and they know the consequences.
Oh boy, good luck with that outlook in today's age. You can trust them to get into shit, I believe helicopter parenting has become prevalent because we've lost the "village" it takes to raise a kid. You used to be able to trust a parent to step in if they were over at someone else's house and a discussion got nasty or a fight broke out. You would have neighbors who looked after the kids and would let you know if they were up to some shit. Now the kids talk on discord and other apps, completely unsupervised or at times even inaccessible (after the fact) if they've set it up right. You've got algorithm's trained on millions of users to suck your kids in, never ending entertainment with minimal effort.
As a parent, who is completely conscious of everything going on around social media and technology, you will absolutely need to step in. Most adults can't even handle it, you WILL have to be the parent who sets boundaries on the stimuli their brain craves but has a negative impact on their overall health. You don't instill healthy eating into a child by giving them unlimited money and telling them to make their own decisions. You work with them, share your experience, let them cook sometimes but monitor over and see the results of their activity. Are they making healthy choices or ordering door dash?
Make it more difficult for them by setting restrictions they have to learn to bypass, even if it feels ridiculous it's a whole different setup for effort-reward. It will interest them into getting into deeper components of technology and how everything works. It's absolutely what kids are suppose to do, just like we always figure out a way to get away with shit which ultimately improves various skills.
Oh absolutely. My point is that supervision should be as low-touch as possible. Let kids screw up when the stakes are low so they don't screw up later when the stakes are higher.
As a kid, I got into things I shouldn't have online, mostly because we only had dialup so I would wait until everyone was in bed to use the computer so I didn't disrupt phone calls coming in. I ended up getting caught, had a productive talk, and learned what to avoid. That was really effective for me, and the lack of firm guardrails got me interested in learning to computers worked, so I taught myself basic webdev as a teen, which launched me into a software dev role.
If we had strict rules preventing computer use, yes, I probably wouldn't have gotten into things I shouldn't, but I also wouldn't have had the freedom to teach myself software dev and probably wouldn't have gotten interested in it.
Oh, and I certainly do, but I use a carrot and stick approach rather than a "guardrails" approach. I tell them what the rules are, but put nothing in place to prevent them from breaking the rules, and when they do (and they will), I'll completely remove access for a time after a discussion about why the rules exist. For example:
That's how I was raised, and I found it incredibly effective. I almost never had things taken away as well, because once they showed they were willing to, I tended to listen and follow the rules.
Sure, but you also don't instill healthy eating habits by not letting them make poor choices either. Let kids fail and fail hard (i.e. don't catch them), but be there to help them back up.
For example, let them eat as much Halloween candy as they want for one day, and then when they inevitably get a stomach ache, they'll learn why moderation is important. Likewise with money, if they waste it all on something stupid and don't have enough for what they really want, they'll learn the value of delayed gratification.
The more natural and immediate the consequence, the more effective it is at teaching them self-discipline.
Obviously, protect them from the worst harms (e.g. we don't let our kids play w/ knives or fire), but let them try and fail while the stakes are low.