Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| reply to yock
Re: Would you put photos of children online?
said by yock  :Presumably, this day care has a playground facility where children play outside within a chain-link fence. The younger kids play within a chain-link fence playground on the premises. The older kids walk to a nearby public park (again behind a chain link fence, but with a constantly open gate) at predictable hours of the day. This park also features a sprinkler that the kids can play in during warm days. (Of course, there's no question that the "sprinkler shots" wouldn't make it online.) |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| reply to NewLife
said by NewLife :Not only could you have a pic gallery there but lots of other information pertaining to the center. That was actually one of the things that got this idea moving from the perpetual planning stages to an actual discussion. We recently had a power outage that affected much of the city of Troy (where the daycare is located). Many parents called to see if the center still had power. The director decided that we should have a place to post announcements of this kind along with other center information. |
|
yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
| reply to Jason Levine
I think you're missing my point. Those children are already on public display every time they play outside. How is this so much more acceptable than posting their picture?
--
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge
"The opposite of war isn't peace, it's creation." |
|
Zupper
Premium
join:2002-12-28
Novelty, OH
| reply to Jason Levine
FWIW, I've read this topic and can only think, "Wow" how sad it is that we have become a culture of worst case scenario. I agree with Yock, and think he said it best.
In this case, I think generic images of groups of kids having fun is a great thing to share, and good advertising for youth oriented places. Who wouldn't want to take their kids to the place (school, daycare, park, museum) where they see other kids having fun? And really, who doesn't want to see pictures of kids having fun?
Yes, I am a parent of young children. I do not think this topic has a definitive NO or even Yes answer. There is always context to consider. But worrying about "the perv with photoshop" is far down my list. |
|
Dynevor
abortion is surgical bombing is murder
Premium
join:2007-05-24
Dime Box, TX
1 edit | said by Zupper :FWIW, I've read this topic and can only think, "Wow" how sad it is that we have become a culture of worst case scenario. Unfortunately, in many cases, "worst case scenario" is becoming common place...WTC, Internet predators, Iraq war, etc, etc. We can no longer write these things off as "it will never happen to me". 
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."(JFK)
--
|
|
yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
| All of those, save one, have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Considering them in a discussion about online photo galleries is just FUD.
said by Dynevor :Internet predators Sure, child predators use the internet now. Is the answer really to not post a child's picture online? Child predators also observe public parks for targets. Should we stop taking children to the park? Predators stakeout schools, are those going to be off limits?
I understand the concept of mitigating risk, but nothing discussed thus far is even remotely convincing that barring a child's photo from the Internet will protect them in some meaningful way. |
|
Dynevor
abortion is surgical bombing is murder
Premium
join:2007-05-24
Dime Box, TX
| said by yock :I understand the concept of mitigating risk, but nothing discussed thus far is even remotely convincing that barring a child's photo from the Internet will protect them in some meaningful way. Argumentative. I could accept that if you preface it with a IMHO.
--
|
|
yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
| Oh, I think we're all intelligent enough here to identify opinion without prefacing it with four silly letters. Besides, no one said I was being humble.
Back on topic. Does it occur to anyone else but be that sheltering children might be having a negative effect on them? Increased incidences of violence at the hands of minors. Increased incidences of mental illness among minors, along with more and more new diagnosis. Our kids are getting released into the real world and aren't coping with it well at all, and I see that as a direct correlation to the last two decades of parents pulling the wool over their eyes.
The best thing you can do for your kids is to be there, right there beside them. Help them experience both the great and terrible things this world will do to them and they'll grow up to take care of themselves. This notion of hiding a photographic representation of them from any and all curious eyes only perpetuates the mentality that children are somehow too fragile to co-exist with us. It's a farce, and it's weakening our society.
--
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge
"The opposite of war isn't peace, it's creation." |
|
Dynevor
abortion is surgical bombing is murder
Premium
join:2007-05-24
Dime Box, TX
| said by yock :Oh, I think we're all intelligent enough here to identify opinion without prefacing it with four silly letters. Besides, no one said I was being humble. Argumentative and naive. Besides IMHO is in my honest opinion, IMO.  ?
--
|
|
yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH | You say naive, I say objective. Thankfully, it's entirely up to the individual to make their decision. |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
 ·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| reply to KAD Imaging
Yes, if you show them naked or in bathing suits in suggestive poses and post those pictures on the Internet, some moronic police officer or prosecutor may give you shit. I presumed we were talking about fully clothed shots of kids playing on a playground or in a room at the day care.
That's got nothing to do with what I posted. |
|
CatSnak
RIP Splashy - We miss you
Premium
join:2001-05-06
Lakeside, CA
| reply to yock
said by yock :Back on topic. Does it occur to anyone else but be that sheltering children might be having a negative effect on them? Increased incidences of violence at the hands of minors. Increased incidences of mental illness among minors, along with more and more new diagnosis. Our kids are getting released into the real world and aren't coping with it well at all, and I see that as a direct correlation to the last two decades of parents pulling the wool over their eyes. The best thing you can do for your kids is to be there, right there beside them. Help them experience both the great and terrible things this world will do to them and they'll grow up to take care of themselves. This notion of hiding a photographic representation of them from any and all curious eyes only perpetuates the mentality that children are somehow too fragile to co-exist with us. It's a farce, and it's weakening our society. Sadly this is too true. My girlfriend and I just had a discussion while on a mini-vacation up north this last weekend on how kids aren't allowed to be kids anymore. I look back at all the things my brother and I used to do and compare it to what kids are doing these days and it saddens me at the loss of freedom kids these days have to deal with. It wasn't all that long ago when kids could safely walk to the corner market or to the park without their parents and no one worried about it. It's no wonder kids these days seem to be more violent, misguided or what ever other term you want to use for the lack of social skills. Too many no longer get the chance to really explore the world until they're thrust into it with little to no knowledge of how it really works.
--
Founding member, 2002-2003, 2005-2006 Director of Communications, 2004-2005 Secretary for the Crunchenstein Project |
|
simplykristi
Cancer Sucks
Premium
join:2001-11-28
Metro KC
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Yahoo
 ·Comcast
| reply to Jason Levine
If you are going to do this, the parents must sign a release. We had to sign a release where I used to work to have photos of us. I worked for a life insurance company.
I have a private gallery of family photos at SmugMug. I've been using it for since January 1, 2006. No one knows where the photos are except me and those with whom I share the link. |
|
Wayne GphFX
Blessed
Premium
join:2004-09-26
Brooklyn, NY
·Optimum Online
| reply to Jason Levine
Picked from today's news
»www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a···07250493
--
»www.flickr.com/photos/waynegphfx/ |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| Maybe I'm just dense, but what does that have to do with the topic at hand? |
|
KAD Imaging
Just Shoot It
Premium
join:2002-09-21
Hialeah, FL
·AT&T Southeast
| said by wierdo :Maybe I'm just dense, but what does that have to do with the topic at hand? I think that was back at wierdo (misspelled btw) who stated in his first post that everyone is overreacting because the threats to children have decreased.  Wayne's and my links prove otherwise. 
--
Like Cars? Visit:
SportCompactMiami.com
forums.sportcompactmiami.com
blog.sportcompactmiami.com |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| said by KAD Imaging :I think that was back at wierdo (misspelled btw) who stated in his first post that everyone is overreacting because the threats to children have decreased. Wayne's and my links prove otherwise. Yes, my nick is misspelled. Deliberately. Thanks for your concern. 
Your news articles are interesting, but prove nothing. Check real crime statistics and you'll find that I'm correct. Also, Wayne GphFX's article specifically states that the material was downloaded from the Internet, including the items on the camera, not fresh meat, as it were.
That guy didn't abuse any children, he looked at child porn. Still disgusting, but completely different. |
|
yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
| reply to KAD Imaging
The topic at hand deals with candid photographs of children possibly being used by predators to select targets for abuse. The linked news article deals with an individual who sought out pornographic images of children.
I don't think the two are related. |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| reply to KAD Imaging
said by KAD Imaging :I think that was back at wierdo (misspelled btw) who stated in his first post that everyone is overreacting because the threats to children have decreased. Wayne's and my links prove otherwise. Your link was to a grandmother who was questioned by police and charged based on a photo development place's employee calling the cops over a nude grandkid photo. The Internet wasn't even involved until the story was posted online.
Wayne's specifically mentioned that the guy downloaded child porn. Child porn is different than your usual "kid at play" photo.
I would say that the first item could easily have been an overreaction and the second likely didn't involve trolling family photo sites for photos of kids. |
|
SND2005
Premium
join:2001-09-15
Im Over Here
 ·CWLab
| reply to Jason Levine
I really don't see what the fuss is about. The kids are not in a bath tub or in suggestive type shots...I could care less so long as I was ASKED prior to the shots being posted. I have 2 kids in a daycare who have not only been posted online but have also been on television a couple times. Remember, a pedo can easily sit around a playground or beach/pool and snap away and take plenty of shots MANY people wouldn't be happy with.
Personally, I'm not going to live my life running around with some pseudo helmet on, nor should my kids IMO.
Let's be realistic however. Your most likely not submitting the web site to google nor are you really going to get more than say...100-500 visitors at most, the threat is really non existent in my view.
Get permission and make a darn good site!
-dan |
|
