Violent games on the OLPC Activities page
echerlin at gmail.com
Fri Jan 18 21:55:12 EST 2008
On Jan 18, 2008 12:58 PM, Jeffrey Kesselman <jeffpk at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 18, 2008 6:17 AM, Chris Hager <chris at linuxuser.at> wrote:
> > Chris Hager wrote:
> > > Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
> > >
> > >> I don't see why breaking this up by tags (some of which can be things like "PG13") isn't a good enough solution. We all know kids will seek this stuff out no matter what, lets at least do it in a controlled way.
None of these rating systems is any good. Where's the category for
stuff that is suitable for children but not for adults? I'm quite
serious about this. (Adults in this context means those who cannot
remember or imagine how it is for children. It has nothing to do with
> > > The MPAA uses those ratings: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PG13#Ratings)
> > >
> > > - G (General Audience - all ages admitted)
> > > - PG (Parental guidance suggested - might not be suitable for children))
> > > - PG-13 (Parents strongly cautioned - might be inappropriate for < 13 years)
> > > - R (Restricted - < 17 years requires parent or adult guardian)
> > > - NC-17 (No children under 17)
> > >
> > > Basically, we could introduce this ratings as tags on [[Activities]].
> > > Xo-get could list only 'G'-rated Activities by default, and users can
> > > then 'enable' all other somewhere in the application (preferences, ...).
> > >
> > Or perhaps a bit lighther version:
> > - G (General Audience) (without tag)
> > - M (Mature material, not recommendet for people under ... years of age)
> Coming up with ratings is relatively easy. The ESRB already has a
> system you can use if
> you want.
> Deciding who gets to decide how they are assigned... thats harder.
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.laptop.org
End Poverty at a Profit by teaching children business
"The best way to predict the future is to invent it."--Alan Kay
More information about the Devel