[Sythe] Underage Gambling - Ethically okay for sythe?

Okay after a very long discussion with richard i've come to the conclusion that we can't really argue the legality of dicing on sythe and how allot of minors are getting in on it. I would like to know what you guys think from a conscious stand point, is this a healthy thing we should condone? My opinion is that morally it's wrong for us to allow people under the age of 18 to be involved in gambling, this is due to the fact that the only thing that will come from this is deterrence from the site (if someone looses allot) + Addiction + scams.


I think removing it all together would be best but least making sure people who openly admit they are under the age of 18 to not be allowed to participate in these sections.

 

Because when I hit 18 although I wasn't as mature as I am now at 20, nor will i be at 25, I don't think it's unacceptable to be entrusted with big decisions that would affect my life at 18 however any younger would be. Also if that's your argument then you would show a bit more concern for 13-15 year olds gambling.

 

How can these rules be enforced? The dice were not implemented here as a gambling tool, simply a vBulletin add on that is being used in many different platforms.

From a personal point of view, a kid shouldn't even be on the internet at such an early age, we are not their parents - we do not decide what they can or cannot do. Their parents should be enforcing rules upon them, and seeing what websites they use - and if they don't like what they see, do something about it. This isn't a friendly summer camp, this is the internet.

If a minor has access to the open internet, he has access to anything and everything. Hell, he could go look at porn if he really wanted to, you can't stop him. He could go on a gambling website and sign up, place a few bets and whattayaknow, he's back to the old habits.

At the end of the day, parents should be enforcing rules; Sythe is here to cater for all demography.

 

So if I wanted to look at child porn or buy drugs online that's my right because it's the internet? I don't see a base argument stating that a minor's parents should be accountable for what he does, i think some restrictions to the 'tool' that vbulletin has in order to govern what we think is okay and not okay isn't necessarily that bad.

 

No, you're not getting my point here.

Child porn? I can't believe you're actually comparing that to gambling, that is disgusting.
Buying drugs online? sure. You can do that, and guess what, so can the kid.

And I can't believe what you're saying at the moment? Let me get this straight, you're against underage gambling, and the use of dicing on Sythe.org YET you say that there is no base argument as to whether or not parents should be responsible of what their children do on the internet? Would you allow for your children to openly search the internet, with no restrictions? and if so, what if he was involved on Sythe.org using the gambling feature? would you then do something about it? and if not, that is somewhat contradicting?
Please, explain.

Parents should be enforcing rules upon their own children, we are here to cater for all demography, if there is a tool or service we offer here, we aren't going to stop just because a few kids are using it for personal benefits.

We, as a community, aren't going to deny the activity it has bought to us, just because of a fault a parent has made. The internet is a big and scary place, nobody underage should be on it.

 

Disagree... Sorry to say... let the kids waste there money... they will learn....
or let there parents deal with it...

 

I'm meant to say it's something that is illegal and ethically is condemned if underage gambling is allowed then what's the reason to just 'stop' there?

I know that's why it's on the 'webmaster' to set some provisions that they deem morally reflect that the website wishes it's reputation to be represented as.

sorry i retract my statement, i wish to state that parent's aren't Solely to be held accountable. I'm trying to make the point that we don't even have a sticky saying 'those who are gambling real life money please understand that if the law in your region specify an age restriction on those under 18 we wish for you to respect that law and to stay away from this section, however don't be deterred to stake/duel virtual gaming items.

Ask yourself this, is a few more internet traffic worth getting kids as young as 12-15 to be exposed and addicted to gambling at such a young age? I'm just trying to make my point that we should make a statement to kind of show how we don't want this new found tool to be a method for kids to bypass the restrictions they have in their own regions.

 

18 is the median age restriction for gambling, i'm sure it was selected for a purpose and i myself have no problem with that being the age. Although your brain is still developing i think by the age of 18 you are able to take responsibility for your actions therefore society deemed it appropriate.

thanks for your input although i don't think parents really know what there kids do on the internet so I think these kids are going to learn the hard way and what's worse is the repercussion that that will cause, Nice to see a fresh perspective but

 

how would you be if your kid is at 16'th age and gambles 200$ away as a parent being, i'm sure you wouldn't like it at all

but it's common sence, gamble it selves is not able to do at younger than 18th, same with alchohol (weed, in some states)

 

Contract of sale isn't a problem though, you are defining morality incorrectly, my morals are just my thoughts on what I believe is right and wrong, and to me people under the age of 18 shouldn't be gambling, i've entrusted people to represent myself and those amongst me (government) to pretty much find what would be an appropriate age for gambling and they have done their research and concluded with 18 which I believe doesn't seem like an unreasonable result. Also the reason contract of sale isn't bad is because it's not 'unhealthy' to trade however gambling as an addiction is.

 

Ok so when i was 18. I was given a gun and sent overseas with the mind set to kill given to me by my goverment stating i was old enough to do so. Yet when i returned home i was not able to legaly go buy a beer. i can kill other humans but not buy a beer. Do you understand? Research backs up sythes statement. Your statement is blindly following a goverments will. Ages have gone up and down. in the 90s the age to drink was lowred then raised back to 21 years later. stop being a puppet. age has little to do with ones mental ability to do certain things. some people should never be alloud to gamble or drink. I personally didnt know you before the ban but if this is what you devoted your time to then some things should be rethought

 

Government is set out to represent people not own them. So nothing really wrong with following a government, obviously not a corrupt one but i'm talking optimistically here. As for that being an argument it's legal for you to go and fight for your country because you were being used as a tool to protect the citizens, the benefits there far outweighs alcohol which fucks with brain development which at the age of 18 is still in it's key phase.

 

Your statements are spoken like facts with no evidence. a beer a day is known to drasticly reduce the chance of heart attack and strokes. google it. your statment is invalid due to the fact your brain is not done developing at 18 or 21. Google it. all i ask is you atleast google some of this shit before you spew it out. Also tge drinking age was 18 for a long time and was so in the 90s. it was changed not because of brain activity but because they noticed a slight increase in car accidents. Google it

 

I'm not actually pulling shit out of my ass I'm talking from what I know, I have an RSA which in Australia > Melbourne is a Responsibility to serve alcohol, you need it to bar tend or serve alcohol in private functions, an when I was taking the course I was told that was the reason

 

Its a means to an end, imo if they aren't here doing then they'd be doing it elsewhere.

Its a parents job to regulate their children, if they're letting their children have free roam of the internet then they're either: a) fine with it as long as it doesn't get out of control, b) naive enough to not have a clue, which is worse because said child could be doing anything or c) just don't care.

I mean what sort of parent wouldn't notice their child's incomings/outgoings and see a pattern of money loss and not question it. If they have their own part time job or other ways of making money and they're throwing their own earned money away, then who are we to stop them, life lessons are learnt by making mistakes.

On my part, gambling has never interested me in the slightest, i think i've bought 2 scratch cards and one lottery in my life but i can see the attraction and to me, as long as they're not throwing stupid amounts of money at it, then its fine.

 

Hey mate thanks for sharing your input, look I can see arguments to both sides and I can see you guys are aware of the point I'm trying to make, i will conclude by saying I think using the Vb tool for gambling especially when your under the age of 18 should be prohibited however I can see why nothing may be done on the matter as well, good chat fellas

 

I think the general logical consensus here is that it's a parent's duty to look after their children, not scythe's.