[ SECRET POST #144 ]

[shahni.livejournal.com]

⌈ Secret Post #144 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.




Notes:

- Con returnee is happy and sleepy. Thus you get early post!

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 75 secrets from Secret Submission Post #021.
Secrets Not Posted: 0 broken links, 0 not!secrets, 0 not!fandom
Next Secret Post: Tomorrow, Wednesday, May 30th, 2007.
Current Secret Submission Post: Here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: 16

[lightpipe.livejournal.com]

The problem is their lack of maturity and by "their" I mean "immature <15 year olds," not "all 15 year olds."
Then why would you decline them from your game because of their age? :\

16

[(Anonymous)]

What? Who said anything about declining? I said there were people like that in a game I play in and I wanted them out.

What's your problem?

Re: 16

[lightpipe.livejournal.com]

Uh. You did: "I hate it when people say 'OMG you dont want me in your RP because I'm under 15?"

:\

Re: 16

[glitterbats.livejournal.com]

Maybe they mean that those people assume they're being rejected because of their age, when actually its their immaturity?

Re: 16

[lightpipe.livejournal.com]

Hmm, that's not what the rest of the secret made it sound like to me, though.

Re: 16

[glitterbats.livejournal.com]

I can understand that. I read it that way at first, until I scrolled down and saw the OP saying that they worded it badly. Plus, I've had people pull the "ageism" card on me a lot when I rejected them from RPs I modded.

Plus, I can kinda understand why someone would be wary of RPers under a certain age. Myself, I can be a little skittish around under-age RPers at first because those are generally the ones who will get upset at me for my character's actions, or if I refuse to play something with them. It isn't fair to the sane under-agers and I know it, but once burnt and all that.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

Exactly; thank you.

Re: 16

[(Anonymous)]

There's a difference between "don't want in" and "got the mods to kick me out of." I'm wary of <15 year olds in general, mostly because of people like the ones I have to deal with now, but the secret wasn't pointed against 15-year-olds.

The point is, it's not because they're 15 and not because of their writing ability, it's because of their immaturity. I hate when they claim either of the two when it has nothing to do with that. Does it make sense now?

Re: 16

[failaga.livejournal.com]

My 2cents: I think the reactions you're getting are simply because you specified an age group. After all, plenty of us are incredibly immature and way over 15.

However, admittedly we may be more aware of the consequences of our actions

- or not. :/

Re: 16

[levikitty.livejournal.com]

The problem here is your wording, you don't specifically state the maturity of the individual in question, but it sounds more like you're addressing all 15-year-olds. Which I suppose you are, now that I've read the comments.