Thread View: alt.internet.access
4 messages
4 total messages
Started by liberator
Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:00
Child Safety Issue, continued...
Author: liberator
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:00
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:00
58 lines
3435 bytes
3435 bytes
liberator.net wrote: >You are not responding to the points, as usual. Who monitors the sysops? Why aren't the sysops required to get screened? Is the public aware that CompuServe allows TOTAL STRANGERS to safeguard their children? CompuServe dropped the ball on this one.< Dave responded: <<At least all CS sysops are *accountable* with names and addresses available to CS.>> But if CompuServe doesn't run a background check on these people and their names to even verify the identities, these people who "safeguard" youngsters can easily be childmolestors. Recording fake names is absolutely no measure for protecting CompuServe children. Admit it. My point is that there is no area on the Internet that is more safe than any other, as far as protecting children goes. This is a no-brainer Dave. CompuServe can pretend all it likes but it isn't anymore family orientated than any other service. Admit it. Liberator wrote: >Usually, volunteers are not allowed to perform critical/sensitive functions. However, CompuServe lets STRANGERS monitor children. That's a BIG problem.< Dave responds: <<All moderated newsgroups (whioch you seem to claim are as good as CS forums) rely on *volunteers.* Period. No one is in charge over them.>> That's my point Dave; CompuServe isn't providing better child-safety measures, although it creates the ILLUSION that it does. <<There have been zero cases where a CS sysop in any of my areas has been a problem at all...>> CompuServe, owned by AOL, has deep pockets. Can you say, 'out-of-court settlements'? <<They are not "STRANGERS" ...>> These STRANGERS provide personal information. Is the information checked by CompuServe? <<This has absolutely nothing to do with your claim that, as a sysop, I must have a CompuServe "supervisor.">> Dave, volunteers who provide critical services, such as handle child-safety measures, need to be screened by CompuServe and be supervised, else these STRANGERS can be doing who knows what with children on the Internet! CompuServe dropped the ball on another issue. -- The Liberator E-Mail: news@liberator.net Web Site: http://www.liberator.net/ Need a reliable and inexpensive Internet provider? Visit CNET: http://webisplist.internetlist.com/
Re: Child Safety Issue, continued...
Author: Darnell
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 00:00
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 00:00
68 lines
3665 bytes
3665 bytes
Please stop cross-posting to chi.internet.... liberator wrote in message <7vfe48$6l1$1@Nntp1.mcs.net>... >liberator.net wrote: >>You are not responding to the points, as usual. Who monitors the sysops? >Why aren't the sysops required to get screened? Is the public aware that >CompuServe allows TOTAL STRANGERS to safeguard their children? CompuServe >dropped the ball on this one.< > >Dave responded: ><<At least all CS sysops are *accountable* with names and addresses >available to CS.>> > >But if CompuServe doesn't run a background check on these people and their >names to even verify the identities, these people who "safeguard" youngsters >can easily be childmolestors. Recording fake names is absolutely no measure >for protecting CompuServe children. Admit it. > >My point is that there is no area on the Internet that is more safe than any >other, as far as protecting children goes. This is a no-brainer Dave. >CompuServe can pretend all it likes but it isn't anymore family orientated >than any other service. Admit it. > >Liberator wrote: >>Usually, volunteers are not allowed to perform critical/sensitive >functions. However, CompuServe lets STRANGERS monitor children. That's a >BIG problem.< > >Dave responds: ><<All moderated newsgroups (whioch you seem to claim are as good as CS >forums) rely on *volunteers.* Period. No one is in charge over them.>> > >That's my point Dave; CompuServe isn't providing better child-safety >measures, although it creates the ILLUSION that it does. > ><<There have been zero cases where a CS sysop in any of my areas has been a >problem at all...>> > >CompuServe, owned by AOL, has deep pockets. Can you say, 'out-of-court >settlements'? > ><<They are not "STRANGERS" ...>> > >These STRANGERS provide personal information. Is the information checked by >CompuServe? > ><<This has absolutely nothing to do with your claim that, as a sysop, I must >have a CompuServe "supervisor.">> > >Dave, volunteers who provide critical services, such as handle child-safety >measures, need to be screened by CompuServe and be supervised, else these >STRANGERS can be doing who knows what with children on the Internet! >CompuServe dropped the ball on another issue. > >-- >The Liberator >E-Mail: news@liberator.net >Web Site: http://www.liberator.net/ > >Need a reliable and inexpensive Internet provider? >Visit CNET: http://webisplist.internetlist.com/ > >
Re: Child Safety Issue, continued...
Author: liberator
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 00:00
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 00:00
38 lines
2850 bytes
2850 bytes
>liberator.net wrote: >You are not responding to the points, as usual. Who monitors the sysops? Why aren't the sysops required to get screened? Is the public aware that CompuServe allows TOTAL STRANGERS to safeguard their children? CompuServe dropped the ball on this one.< >.. if CompuServe doesn't run a background check on these people and their names to even verify the identities, these people who "safeguard" youngsters can easily be childmolestors. Recording fake names is absolutely no measure for protecting CompuServe children. Admit it.< >My point is that there is no area on the Internet that is more safe than any other, as far as protecting children goes. This is a no-brainer Dave. CompuServe can pretend all it likes but it isn't anymore family orientated than any other service. Admit it.< >Usually, volunteers are not allowed to perform critical/sensitive functions. However, CompuServe lets STRANGERS monitor children. That's a BIG problem.< >Dave, volunteers who provide critical services, such as handle child-safety measures, need to be screened by CompuServe and be supervised, else these STRANGERS can be doing who knows what with children on the Internet! CompuServe dropped the ball on another issue.< Darnell <No_Reply@Needed.com> wrote: <<Please stop cross-posting to chi.internet....>> Darnell, okay. I'll keep chi.internet off of future cross-post lists. But you have to admit, CompuServe is dead wrong on this issue. -- The Liberator E-Mail: news@liberator.net Web Site: http://www.liberator.net/ Need a reliable and inexpensive Internet provider? Visit CNET: http://webisplist.internetlist.com/
Re: Child Safety Issue, continued...
Author: Ed
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 00:00
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 00:00
56 lines
3702 bytes
3702 bytes
Mark, Does Darnell realize that *anyone* can come into a classroom in Chicago, whether a teacher, an aide, a student teacher, or a volunteer, and be a child molester?? There is no checking of *all* classroom participants. Or that the Chicago school system will not release the names of the child molesters caught within the Chicago school system in the past 5 years. Has the Chicago school system ever documented your sexual preferences? You're a teacher, a member of the system, can you address the situation? Ed liberator wrote: > > >liberator.net wrote: > >You are not responding to the points, as usual. Who monitors the sysops? > Why aren't the sysops required to get screened? Is the public aware that > CompuServe allows TOTAL STRANGERS to safeguard their children? CompuServe > dropped the ball on this one.< > > >.. if CompuServe doesn't run a background check on these people and their > names to even verify the identities, these people who "safeguard" youngsters > can easily be childmolestors. Recording fake names is absolutely no measure > for protecting CompuServe children. Admit it.< > > >My point is that there is no area on the Internet that is more safe than > any other, as far as protecting children goes. This is a no-brainer Dave. > CompuServe can pretend all it likes but it isn't anymore family orientated > than any other service. Admit it.< > > >Usually, volunteers are not allowed to perform critical/sensitive > functions. However, CompuServe lets STRANGERS monitor children. That's a > BIG problem.< > > >Dave, volunteers who provide critical services, such as handle child-safety > measures, need to be screened by CompuServe and be supervised, else these > STRANGERS can be doing who knows what with children on the Internet! > CompuServe dropped the ball on another issue.< > > Darnell <No_Reply@Needed.com> wrote: > <<Please stop cross-posting to chi.internet....>> > > Darnell, okay. I'll keep chi.internet off of future cross-post lists. But > you have to admit, CompuServe is dead wrong on this issue. The Chicago > school system should be exposed. > > -- > The Liberator > E-Mail: news@liberator.net > Web Site: http://www.liberator.net/ > > Need a reliable and inexpensive Internet provider? > Visit CNET: http://webisplist.internetlist.com/
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads