Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

Having a pre-moderated forum could also lead to the mods themselves having a fallout or two, we all have a difference of opinion, and one mans joke may be another mans blasphemy ;)

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

Believe me you don’t need a pre-modded forum to get those sorts of fireworks. You should have seen some of our IRC team meets back in the day … :fit:

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

Oh I know, having been many years ago, a mod on a gaming forum :)

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

Well I dont need to "claim" since I can access the actual figures. ;)

So far, in 2026, the average has been 51 per day, ranging from 15 on a slow day, to 110 on a busy day. :cool:

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

Sorry been a while since I actually had chance to do anything on my pc or look at anything on the internet properly, as my Unraid server thank's to the heat has decided to throw it's toys out of the pram and now needs fixing.

The joy's of heat combined with 24 SAS Drives, 8x NVME Drives and a CPU that can pull nearly 700w of power at full tilt!!


The following is not meant to cause offence, but the fact some people will no doubt see it as "Offensive" just goes to prove my point!


So if they want to ban anyone that say's anything classed as "inappropriate" that would be "Everyone" since someone will always find a way to say what you said was "inappropriate".

So any person who is black say's the n-word, types it or even intimates they want to say or type it, they are instantly banned.

Any white person who does the same for the same word is also banned but this time they are also tagged and labelled a racist for saying something that black people say and call each other daily.

Then you have someone british saying "I am going to buy a packet of fags and a lighter", automatically that get's them banned because in America the word "fag" is deemed a homophobic slur and as such is "inappropriate" for anyone to say.

Then you have an American say "I want a fanny pack", that get's them banned because that word is well slang in the UK and a "insult" but also deemed "inappropriate" to many to say or type.


How about when a black person say's "I smelt something that smelt like wet dog, whilst stood next to a white person at a bus stop whilst taking shelter from the rain", that is something that is not only "racist" to some but also "inappropriate" to many.


You cannot ban something or someone from the internet etc for saying something which you feel is "inappropriate", because as I say, you would have to ban EVERYONE.

You cannot even as mentioned later in the thread from the above quote have Admin's and Mod's consistently check and approve every post on a forum or social media site because "something might be offensive", because what offends me is probably not going to offend you and I can fairly confidently say that 99% of what offends you won't offend me.

The expansion of the "Online Safety Act" is already putting kids at risk, because it's removing the ability for kids to see what harms they are potentially being exposed to, because their teachers are "Woke" or because they are being forced on "School Trips" and "After School Clubs" to Mosques, Churches, Political Indoctrination Meetings etc and forced to take part without there parents being informed.


The Online Safety Act is a money, data and control grab, force people to prove their age, make money by doing so, get their information by doing so, stop them accessing websites even legit websites because they don't want their information linked with that site for what ever reason.

You take away the money, you take away the data and the control and the Online Safety Act will disappear, it's why none of the governments involved in it, want to use a system which was created by Linux developers that keeps all the information private and is free.

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

I imagine that what children/young people meant by 'inappropriate' would be things like harrassment, bullyjng, swearing, making threats, sexualised content, grooming, encouraging self harm/suicide, things of this nature.

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

Well that doesn't leave much.
Can we lock them up somewhere ultra safe until they become adults?

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

Ban all smart devices to anyone would perhaps work :D

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

I'm gonna start a "ban the internet" group, we're gonna have web pages, blogs, a forum, a facebook group and everything . . . oh wait :erm:

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

The obvious answer is to have children’s phones that can only access ‘safe’ sites. Adults shouldn’t have to suffer detriment from these measures and social media sites should not have to jump through hoops to protect children and the hyper-sensitive types.

Such sites that are harmful to children should not be available to children, period. Hyper-sensitives should buy themselves children’s phones.

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

Do these "children's phones" exist?

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

I don’t think so, but surely it is the way to go.

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

I'm not sure you fully understand the complexity of what you're proposing...

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

Agreed, it's too complex . . and within a month someone somewhere will have found a way to make them perform like a 'normal' phone . . which is why the quote below is the best option I've seen, and will also probably save us all a lot of money.

Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 

One idea put forward is, during set up, for a child's date of birth to be input. This would only make adult sites available from a given age

Various judiciary systems throughout the world have confirmed that social media (and other) sites are responsible for having a duty of care for their users so, even if this measure were adopted, they would still need to make reasonable efforts to protect users.