In reality being a minor is a real pain in the butt unless you are into
malls and your parents credit cards and consumer gratification!
My mother used to go through me mail and even when I was an adult when she
was visiting my house used to go through my office and bedroom. And, she did
not miss much -- even asked what the hooks in the bedroom ceiling were for
--as if she could not guess. I finally just gave up and left everything out.
At 11:22 AM 10/11/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>Samantha Atkins wrote:
>> "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote:
>> > NC-17 text in the message bodies, sure - be it far from me to deny any
>> > minor the right to surreptitiously read racy subject matter online -
>> > not shock Mom whenever she happens to lean over the computer.
>> Barf. "Gay" and "Sex" are not ok? Don't you think that is going just a
>> little too far? Johnny can read about the SI that might just eat the
>> world but not read that some people are gay or bisexual? Interesting.
>Johnny can read playboy.com for all I care. In fact, my guess is that the
>reading of online pornography by minors is a positive force in society.
>Certainly, minors reading Extropians are a positive force in society.
>Therefore, I'm saying we should help Johnny keep his secrets.
>Olga Bourlin wrote:
>> The problem is being sex-negative. The solution is to drag oneself out of
>> the mawkish Victorian era. This is, after all, an "extropians" list,
>> n'est-ce pas?
>Yes, that's *why* online pornography is a positive social force.
>> Oh OK, well, there's Christians in my family, and I am reading the list, is
>> it reasonable to ask dont put athiest in subject line??
>I remember being a bit nervous about that, since my family was Orthodox Jewish
>(and I wasn't, AND they didn't know) - but that's the sort of thing that can
>probably be explained. You can probably get away with saying: "I'm not
>reading that part," or "I disagree with them about that part," even if it's an
>outright lie. I haven't seen any newspaper articles warning parents about
>their children coming into contact with online atheism.
>You're a bit out of touch with Mom Logic, aren't you?
>But that's not the real reason - keeping "atheism" out of the subject lines
>would be a major and unusual inconvenience and it really would border on
>Family Correctness, like trying to keep message bodies clean. Keeping the
>subject lines PG-13 is just ordinary netiquette, if you ask me.
>> And also: a MAJor faux pas HERE: there's nothing pornographic about Gayness.
>> Or having sex to stay young.
>Of course there isn't.
>> If we put something like "Teen Fuck Blowjobs" - sure, OK, I'd agree -
>> otherwise, if you are grown up enough to handle the topics here you can also
>> be a grown up
>> and deal with it in the subject line
>Of course you can...
>> - and be honest with your parents if
>> they are looking over your shoulder
>...but *this* idea - Nadia, what planet did you grow up on?
>-- -- -- -- --
>Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/
>Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
Ralph Lewis, Professor of Management and Human Resources
College of Business
California State University, Long Beach
Long Beach, California
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:16 MDT