Simple Way To Watch Over Kids On The Internet ? ? ?
Paul Ber
folder so that there would be no way of deleting anything
from it; a parent could sit down at the computer in the
evening and check every site their children had gone to
during the day.
If bad site had be gone to, then the parent could tell
Johnny, if he continues to go to bad sites, he will be off
the Internet.
Seems simple to me. Can this be done so the child can't
wipe out the History folder ?
Paul Ber
Carey Frisch [MVP]
good Internet Security program with parental
controls.
Example:
http://www.symantec.com/home_homeoffice/products/overview.jsp?pcid=is&pvid=nis2006
--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
Microsoft Community Newsgroups
news://msnews.microsoft.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Ber
Do you know if the History folder can be password locked ?
"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfr...@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
news:urTltkVZ...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Alias
> I appreciate your answer, but that's not what I asked.
> Do you know if the History folder can be password locked ?
Ever consider talking to your children rather than playing cloak and
dagger games with them? They will always win.
Alias
Paul Ber
them not to do, so you always have to have a way to check up on
them. If you think you can just talk to them and everything is going
to be ok, you've got your head in the clouds. Sorry.
You must check on them even though you talk to them every day.
It would be great if the Clear History button in IE were gone and
the History folder could be password locked. No need to spend
money for software that no one can tell me is 100% perfect. 2 or
3 times a week, you can read what's in the History folder, and if
Johnny has gone somewhere he's not suspose to, then you can
cut him off the internet for whatever period you consider a reasonable
time as punishment. And if he still goes to bad places, cut him off
forever. SIMPLE
"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:eEgHA5VZ...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
BillW
Your concern is extremely valid. I am of the age that I now discuss
concerns such as yours with my daughter about my granddaughter's baby
sitters and what can she do when my granddaughter is of the age that she can
use a computer and use the internet. If I had school age children at home,
I would take every measure and use every tool to make sure that they not
fall into the hands of a predator. This is nothing to play with and Polly
Ana statements that all you have to do is talk to your kids is not
responsible. It's your responsibility to protect your kids and that's what
you're trying to do. "Do not speak to strangers" is not enough. These
people that prey on your kids are the best at what they do and we have to
protect our children from this scum.
There are several good monitors that you can run on your computer. One we
have used at the office is Spector Pro (product name). Do a Google search
and go to the Spector Pro site and read about it's functionality. It costs
about $100, but it's an investment that falls in to the category of seat
belts, door locks, etc. I feel that it's a requirement in this day and age.
The software is not detectable and will show you the websites that were
visited, key strokes, IM discussions, etc. I think it's important to use
the best tool possible and the History folder (whether you can lock it or
not) is not the best tool.
Good luck and congratulations on an effort to protect your children. By all
means don't be concerned about invasion of their privacy or a concern that
they might do something that you would not approve of. This is not an issue
of communications - this is a father being responsible and protecting his
family. Again, good job and follow through with what you're trying to do.
Bill
"Paul Ber" <427...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:_R62g.9$nJ...@fe05.lga...
Alias
> Talking to kids is fine, but they still get curious and do things you tell
> them not to do, so you always have to have a way to check up on
> them. If you think you can just talk to them and everything is going
> to be ok, you've got your head in the clouds. Sorry.
> You must check on them even though you talk to them every day.
> It would be great if the Clear History button in IE were gone and
> the History folder could be password locked. No need to spend
> money for software that no one can tell me is 100% perfect. 2 or
> 3 times a week, you can read what's in the History folder, and if
> Johnny has gone somewhere he's not suspose to, then you can
> cut him off the internet for whatever period you consider a reasonable
> time as punishment. And if he still goes to bad places, cut him off
> forever. SIMPLE
Apparently I have a different relationship with my children than you do.
Clearing out the history, cache and cookies is good housecleaning.
Johnny should get a gold star. Teach him how to run AdAware, the virus
scanner and Spybot to complete the package and then give him a platinum
star.
Maybe Johnny doesn't consider it any of your business where he's been in
cyber space.
Alias
Lem
Try asking your question in microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin or microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage
Of course, merely locking out "clear history" might not prevent a knowledgeable person (and kids can become very motivated to become very knowledgeable about computers) from deleting the history file manually. Without thinking about it very much, it seems to me as if you need to give a user, even a limited user, read/write access to the IE history folder or IE won't work very well.
Or get a commercial app like Net Nanny. I've never used these, but I understand that they typically generate activity logs, in addition to actually blocking "bad" sites. If you'd rather see if your kids are following your advice/rules rather than simply presenting them with a locked door, you can probably set NN or the like to permit access to most sites while still logging.
Paul Ber
clout that people like me with Microsoft. You should go to Bill G and say;
You can become the Good Guy of The World. Just get rid of the Delete
Button in IE (for History), and make the History folder password lockable,
and every parent will make Bill their God Father to their children.
No cost, no peaking over their shoulder, no having to put the computer out
in an open space, no nothing. Again, no software is bulletproof. If a
parent
buys your $100 item, they are likely to get passive and never check their
kids,
thinking the software is blocking everything. Not true. Parents need to
check.
And it should be simple and free.
Just check the History folder 2 or 3 times a week and cut the kid off if he
goes to a bad place. This is what I did with my son from the age of 8 to
18.
After that I stopped checking because he went off to college.
Guess what, he never went to bad places once he knew I could check up on
him and he knew I was doing it. That's what parents need to do.
Paul Ber
"BillW" <x...@xxx.com> wrote in message
news:0f2dnYcb7MB...@comcast.com...
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> Talking to kids is fine, but they still get curious and do things you
> tell them not to do, so you always have to have a way to check up on
> them. If you think you can just talk to them and everything is going
> to be ok, you've got your head in the clouds. Sorry.
I think Alias is right and you are wrong.
If you start talking to your kids early--about everything--they will
keep you informed of their activities. And if you realize that part of
becoming an individual and an adult is experimentation, you'll perhaps
be a little less heavy-handed in your approach, i.e., instead of "If you
don't stay off bad sites, I'm taking the computer away," try "Let's talk
about what you saw on Ogrish this afternoon."
If you play cat and mouse games with your kids, they will become ever
more clever and more devious mice.
My daughter is 21. I wouldn't do everything she does, but she does
nothing that does not meet with my approval, because her core values are
good. And she's not afraid to talk with me about anything.
Good luck figuring out how to spy on your children.
rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
I've been through some awful worries, and
some of them actually happened. Mark Twain
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> I'm going to make this the last post. You MVP's out there that have
> more clout that people like me with Microsoft. You should go to Bill
> G and say; You can become the Good Guy of The World. Just get rid of
> the Delete Button in IE (for History), and make the History folder
> password lockable, and every parent will make Bill their God Father
> to their children.
Not every parent.
Just the control freaks.
rl
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> As a minor he has no expectation of privacy, he's under his parents
> control until he's considered an Adult.
To some extent this is true. But there are laws to inhibit parents who
believe they are God.
Fortunately.
> The parents of the Columbine kids thought they knew what their kids
> were doing too - it's always best to make sure you know what your
> kids are doing.
Do you understand what a fallacy is? Because you just went right down
the old slippery slope. Among other things.
If this is what you believe about childrearing, please don't have
children. There are enough kids in the world who are totally screwed up
by control-freak parents, and we don't need more.
rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
I am who I choose to be. I always have been what I chose...
though not always what I pleased. Lois McMaster Bujold
Carey Frisch [MVP]
the internet for a password hack and foil it?
Like I suggested before, consider purchasing a
good internet security program!
Plato
>
> It seems to me, if one could password lock the History
> folder so that there would be no way of deleting anything
> from it; a parent could sit down at the computer in the
> evening and check every site their children had gone to
> during the day.
Best not to invade your kids privacy.
Alias
Hear, hear!
Alias
Alias
I have Firefox set so that it clears the history, cache, cookies,
everything, when my daughter closes it.
Alias
Rhonda Lea Kirk
[snip everything}
Dude, do you always make off-center interpretations of what people
write? Or am I special?
And, um...because I am a collector of strange links that apparently have
no bearing on the world we live in today:
rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
The only thing that makes life worth living is the willingness to
risk everything. Unless you risk everything, you don't have a life.
Roger Payne
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> Rhonda Lea Kirk says...
>> Leythos wrote:
>> [snip everything}
>> Dude, do you always make off-center interpretations of what people
>> write? Or am I special?
> I don't have a clue as to what you mean. My comments were direct,
> completely on topic, and accurate.
Okay. I see now. The sincerity is obvious, and you don't have a clue
about the flaws in your arguments.
> Maybe you could explain what you mean?
Well, no. It would be a waste of time for both of us, and we'd never get
anywhere. Been there, done that, still grinding my teeth. It would be
like...someone here trying to teach me to build my own computer. I don't
have the necessary background, just like you don't have the background
to see the flaws in what you wrote.
I thought you were just an a$$hole. My mistake, and I apologize, and I
won't make it again. I'll disagree with you when I disagree, if we get
off onto another one of these side conversations, but instead of what I
did this time, I'll try in the future to understand what you really
mean, not what you write.
Again, I apologize for the approach, but, for the record, I continue to
disagree with your approach to childrearing.
rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
I am who I choose to be. I always have been what I chose...
Rick Brandt
> I'm going to make this the last post. You MVP's out there that have more
> clout that people like me with Microsoft. You should go to Bill G and say;
> You can become the Good Guy of The World. Just get rid of the Delete
> Button in IE (for History), and make the History folder password lockable,
> and every parent will make Bill their God Father to their children.
>
> No cost, no peaking over their shoulder, no having to put the computer out
> in an open space, no nothing. Again, no software is bulletproof. If a parent
> buys your $100 item, they are likely to get passive and never check their
> kids,
> thinking the software is blocking everything. Not true. Parents need to
> check.
> And it should be simple and free.
>
> Just check the History folder 2 or 3 times a week and cut the kid off if he
> goes to a bad place. This is what I did with my son from the age of 8 to 18.
> After that I stopped checking because he went off to college.
> Guess what, he never went to bad places once he knew I could check up on
> him and he knew I was doing it. That's what parents need to do.
It takes a couple minutes to install Opera or Firefox or some other browser that
doesn't use that history folder. Locking IE's would accomplish nothing.
Alias
>
> Again, I apologize for the approach, but, for the record, I continue to
> disagree with your approach to childrearing.
>
> rl
If you think that's bad, you should hear what he thinks about politics.
Alias
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> If you think that's bad, you should hear what he thinks about
> politics.
I suppose if I hang around long enough, I'll find out, eh? ;)
As far as I'm concerned, ones "right to swing ends at other guy's nose."
Any political theory that fails to take that into account--or that feels
compelled to embellish--is a waste of time. I would like the world a lot
better if we could all let go of the notion that we have the right to
tell others how to live.
Of course, under that theory, most, if not all, of the currently
established political structures would collapse. IMO, the sole role of
government is to collect just enough in taxes to build infrastructure.
(I'm a pagan myself, but I do believe that it is the right and
obligation of the churches (and individuals) to be charitable and to
take care of those who are down on their luck. With the more personal
approach, institutionalized poverty goes down the tubes.)
...in other words, the rules I apply to childrearing are no different
than those I apply to the adult children who play at running the
world...
How do you think that will play? <grin>
rl
Alias
Leythos voted for Bush and thinks that Bush is doing a great job. Does
that answer your question?
Alias
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> Leythos voted for Bush and thinks that Bush is doing a great job. Does
> that answer your question?
I'd probably feel that way too, if we'd gotten out of Iraq as quickly as
we got in. As it is, one member of the community with which I identify
myself has died, another has lost his leg, and many of the rest are
permanently scarred in one way or another. I take that very personally
If one is going to do a job, one should do it and get it done.
I heard recently that Dubya suffers from Graves Disease. As someone with
an autoimmune thyroid condition of my own, I can promise you that anyone
with an untreated impaired thyroid is *not* in his right mind, and he is
incapable of making considered and coherent decisions.
By definition, he is not doing a good job. He can't. His judgment is
totally out of whack.
Besides which, he's altogether too paternalistic for my taste. ;)
rl
mamamia
> It would be best to become proactive and install a
> good Internet Security program with parental
> controls.
>
> Example:
>
Carey, it's bad enough you keep telling people to buy new retail copies
of Windows when they really don't need to waste their money, but now you
are recommending sucky Symantec products? Puh-lease!
capitan
You don't understand. Some kids don't give you the chance to respect
their privacy! I have a 15 yr old who will constantly sneak onto any
internet connected computer to access inappropiate material (from home,
school, library, grandparent's house, sneak into his old school to surf)
and has been doing this for many years. Many times over the years, we
try to trust him, try to believe his word when he says he will stop, but
always it is lip service. Now we don't trust software to guard him, he
is only allowed on to do homework/check email when one of us is there to
watch his every move online. We had to learn the hard way.
I think if your kid proves theirself to be trustable (you only find this
out by checking on their every move in the begining), then that's fine,
you can trust them until they prove otherwise. In my eyes, they need to
prove it over and over, They need to learn that respect and trust is
earned, not just given.
--
capitan
Rhonda Lea Kirk
>In my eyes, they need to prove it over and over,
> They need to learn that respect and trust is earned,
> not just given.
It works both ways. And kids learn by example, no more, no less.
A parent who has earned the respect and trust of his children doesn't
need to resort to cat and mouse games.
rl
Alias
> In article <ebCe4rIa...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>, rhon...@gmail.com
> says...
> doing or capable of doing.... If you trust your kids without reason to
> trust them, without some proof they can be trusted, then you are one of
> the reasons we have problem kids. Kids make mistakes, it's up to you to
> teach them about the mistakes so that they learn from them - not all
> GOOD kids will come to their parents when they make a mistake.
>
What happened? Did you catch your kid installing XP on two computers or
installing an pirated XP?
Heh.
Alias
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> doing or capable of doing.... If you trust your kids without reason to
> trust them, without some proof they can be trusted, then you are one
> of the reasons we have problem kids. Kids make mistakes, it's up to
> you to teach them about the mistakes so that they learn from them -
> not all GOOD kids will come to their parents when they make a mistake.
I don't have a problem kid. And I don't have to defend the way I reared
her, because she's a functioning adult. I will note, however, that
something really bad happened to her a few years ago--not her fault--and
she survived it, largely as a result of the way she was taught to see
the world.
But you didn't *hear* what I'm saying here.
Children who are fearful of their parents hide as much as they can.
Children who do not trust and respect their parents do what they feel
like without regard for the consequences.
Children who trust and respect their parents because their parents
taught them trust and respect by example (by trusting and respecting
them) do not need to be checked on because they will be forthcoming
about their activities.
There are some kids who are born sociopaths. Then it doesn't matter what
kind of parent you are, because they're born with something (empathy)
missing, and you can't do a damn thing about it.
But for the rest, the above does work, and they'll be much healthier for
it.
OTOH, some parents can't deal with it when their kids end up on a sex
site and come to them and say "Mom, what's BDSM?" And that's where the
problem arises.
Back when my grandmother was a girl--she's 99 right now--children were
not shielded from the realities of life. The didn't see live sex between
humans on the internet, they saw it between the animals on the farm.
They didn't need rotten.com, because when someone had a bad accident and
they brought him home broken and bleeding to wait for the doctor (and
most likely, to die), the kids saw that too.
But today, we let 11-year olds dress up like hookers on the one hand and
on the other, we try to protect their "innocence."
Innocent? Children? We need to believe that, but it flies in the face of
all known fact. They are ignorant of some things--but they have to learn
those things sooner or later. But from birth, they are not ignorant of
sexuality, they are not ignorant of cruelty...kids are born with a lot
more knowledge than we seem to give them credit for
The only way to rear a child is to feed her the bites of reality for
which she is ready as you go along. And if you do that, and if you talk
to her and if you give her guidance and offer your best judgment about
the morality involved, you'll find that you will have instilled your own
core values without even trying.
But hey, rear your kids your own way. The human race will survive.
rl
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> What happened? Did you catch your kid installing XP on two computers
> or installing an pirated XP?
>
> Heh.
<keyboard!>
Damn. I was eating ravioli. I really oughta know better.
<still laughing>
rl
Rhonda Lea Kirk
The other day I was looking at the website of one of the MVPs here, and
I took note of the fact that he was a Hugh Prather fan (although he
didn't not mention my favorite book: /I Touch the Earth, the Earth
Touches Me/).
Anyway, in reading Prather lo those many years ago (about 30 now), I
came across an interesting idea. I believe it is the Hopis who say "the
child that I live with" rather than "my child."
Now the other idea that goes hand in hand with this, I either got from
Heinlein or...I'm not sure who, actually...is this: our children do not
belong to us. We are the vehicles for their existence and it is our job
to shape them (to some extent), but after that, all we can do is launch
them and hope they land well.
At the moment, Leythos, we live in a very paternalist, irresponsible
society. I see that mostly as a failure of good parenting, because it is
the attitudes we learn at our parents' knees that stay with us, no
matter how much we pretend to reject them. It isn't what we tell our
children and it isn't what we punish our children for, but what our
children see *us* do that determines how they will behave.
You and I have rupture, because I believe the above with all my heart,
and it fits with everything I have seen and everything I know about
human psychology. It is not what we *do* to our children but what our
children see us do that forms their character. Kids have inborn logic,
and they know when things don't make sense. They understand all too well
"do as I say and not as I do." "Because I said so..." is not a good
reason, and kids understand that instinctively. Worse yet, such
attitudes foster a culture of abuse which follows us into adulthood. We
become control freaks as a reaction against being overcontrolled in an
environment where all privilege belongs to the powerful (i.e., parents).
As I said, rear your children as you wish. I've already done my parental
duty (well, okay, I'm still doing it, because in some ways, it never
ends), and I no longer have to worry about my impact on tender young
minds.
But I will tell you one thing. It wasn't inappropriate places on the
'net that got my daughter into that really bad situation I mentioned, it
was an online chat with a kid she'd known since grammar school.
Maybe you should just cut your kids off completely. Safer that way. (And
down the slippery slope I go. <grin>)
rl
Rick
thread has gone way off from answering a Windows XP question. I'm a Law
Enforcement Officer. I won't say where but have been doing it 23 years.
Parents are told to put their computers in a public area of the house to
restrict internet access to kids. They are also told to filter their
childrens internet access through their IP provider or software. I have been
asked to do interviews by news people in the past regarding children and
their use of the internet as a citizen, not my job. The first time was after
a local boy e-mailed plans to a girl about bombing their middle school.
Parents should know what their kids are doing. I trust mine but do spot
check them very now and then to make sure they are where they say they are
going or with who they said they would be with. This is without their
knowledge. I have caught many decent kids doing bad things and know all of
their tricks. I have met many parents who trusted their kids too much and
paid the ultimate price. Their children are alive and they will have to
live with this the rest of their lives.
The law allows parents to do many things and expects the parents to raise
their children, not the schools, police or courts. If a parent mentally or
physically abuses their children they will be disciplined by the state. As I
said on TV children do not have a right to privacy on their computer and they
should be prepared for when they work one day, since they will not have
privacy on their computer at their employer. Please don't bash a man for
wanting to make sure his children are staying safe. That's all I have to say
about that.
--
In the quest for knowledge.
Rick
--
In the quest for knowledge.
"Rick" wrote:
> I was looking to block My Space .com also but too afraid to ask. This
> thread has gone way off from answering a Windows XP question. I'm a Law
> Enforcement Officer. I won't say where but have been doing it 23 years.
> Parents are told to put their computers in a public area of the house to
> restrict internet access to kids. They are also told to filter their
> childrens internet access through their IP provider or software. I have been
> asked to do interviews by news people in the past regarding children and
> their use of the internet as a citizen, not my job. The first time was after
> a local boy e-mailed plans to a girl about bombing their middle school.
> Parents should know what their kids are doing. I trust mine but do spot
> check them very now and then to make sure they are where they say they are
> going or with who they said they would be with. This is without their
> knowledge. I have caught many decent kids doing bad things and know all of
> their tricks. I have met many parents who trusted their kids too much and
> paid the ultimate price. Their children are not alive and they will have to
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> I was looking to block My Space .com also but too afraid to ask.
Why not just tell your kids you want them to stay off MySpace?
> This thread has gone way off from answering a Windows XP question.
> I'm a Law Enforcement Officer. I won't say where but have been doing
> it 23 years. Parents are told to put their computers in a public area
> of the house to restrict internet access to kids. They are also told
> to filter their childrens internet access through their IP provider
> or software. I have been asked to do interviews by news people in
> the past regarding children and their use of the internet as a
> citizen, not my job. The first time was after a local boy e-mailed
> plans to a girl about bombing their middle school. Parents should
> know what their kids are doing. I trust mine but do spot check them
Do you think the sort of parents who have reared a child who is capable
of coming up with such a plot are going to be checking up on his
internet usage?
That's the problem. People who have no relationship with their children
aren't going to be protecting society from those children, because
they're not even protecting their children.
My daughter was stalked on AOL by a 56-year old man who pretended to be
an 18-year old boy. At first she believed him...but she told me about it
anyway (just as she tells me about most things), and we did some
fact-checking (I did the complicated stuff alone, and we did the easy
stuff together), and we learned what a schlub he was.
Law enforcement DID NOT HELP ME, although I did ask for help. But
because my daughter was 16 years old, she was beyond the point of being
"protected." So the bastard got away with the harm he caused up to the
point we outed him, and he's probably now off after some other teenager.
> very now and then to make sure they are where they say they are going
> or with who they said they would be with. This is without their
> knowledge. I have caught many decent kids doing bad things and know
> all of their tricks. I have met many parents who trusted their kids
> too much and paid the ultimate price. Their children are alive and
> they will have to live with this the rest of their lives.
Short of having given birth to a sociopath (and some people do), a
parent who fosters a good relationship with his child from birth does
not need to worry about what his kid is doing, because his kid will tell
him.
Unfortunately, there are few parents who do this, and when the shit hits
the fan, they are totally bewildered as to why "Johnny went wrong."
> The law allows parents to do many things and expects the parents to
> raise their children, not the schools, police or courts. If a parent
> mentally or physically abuses their children they will be disciplined
> by the state. As I said on TV children do not have a right to
And the schools foster an attitude in kids that their parents cannot
punish them at all.
When my daughter was 12, she missed the bus for 10 days in a row. I was
incensed on the 11th day. As I drove her to school, I ranted. When she
was O-D with me at school--standing outside the car with the door open,
brushing her hair while I told her to go inside--I simply pushed her
stuff off the seat onto the sidewalk and left. I probably should have
given more consideration to the fact that the raging hormone years had
begun, but two weeks of driving her to school had frayed my temper. (She
hated school...with good reason.)
Apparently, she was upset, and when asked by her teacher what was wrong,
she told the story.
The New Jersey Division of Family Services showed up at my door two
hours later. Why?
Well, I told the social worker the whole story, and she said, "Well,
that's not why I'm here." <total bewilderment> "Okay, why are you here?"
"Because your daughter thinks you're going to kill her."
I don't know about you, but my mother said that to me all the time, and
I was never in fear of my life. "If you track on this floor, I'm going
to kill you." "If you get your clothes dirty before church, I'm going to
kill you."
"If you miss the school bus again, I'm going to kill you."
What was it Bill Cosby used to say? "I brought you into this world and I
can take you right back out again."
Child abuse on national TV. Officer, arrest that man.
My daughter didn't know that repeating the story verbatim was going to
cause such a ruckus, and the ruckus scared her to death.
It's a lot of power to hand to any kid, however--the idea that if they
say certain words, they can get their parents in a lot of trouble.
I'm not the only parent with a story like this, but my story ended with
a whimper, not a bang. (Well, it was pretty stupid.)
So please don't tell me what the law allows or expects, because it is
being subverted and perverted every single day in our schools.
> privacy on their computer and they should be prepared for when they
> work one day, since they will not have privacy on their computer at
> their employer. Please don't bash a man for wanting to make sure his
> children are staying safe. That's all I have to say about that.
Checking up on your kids won't keep them safe. It will only make them
learn to hide things because they fear what you will do when you know.
Making them believe down deep that no matter what they do, you will love
them makes them a lot more forthcoming about their activities. And then,
one night when they're out and everyone is drunk, instead of ending up a
highway statistic, they'll call you for a ride home, secure in the
knowledge that they're not going to be berated and grounded a hundred
years for experimenting with alcohol, but lauded for making the right
choice to call at 1 am.
rl
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>> And the schools foster an attitude in kids that their parents cannot
>> punish them at all.
>
> You missed the boat on this one - it's the liberal parents that put an
> end to punishment and block the schools from imposing any real form of
> punishment. The Liberal parents bread kids that learn they can sue
> their parents if they discipline them, those brats teach others that
> become brats.....
I wonder how it is, then, that my sister the born-again Christian who
sent her children to a private, religious school has had so much more
trouble from her children than I have had from mine. I wouldn't trust
one of them even as far as I could throw him or her.
Do you think it's because she is a liberal parent? Hardly. Maybe the
real reason is that the situation she was in did not permit her to give
time and attention to her children because she popped out four of them
and just couldn't keep up? Or maybe it is that her very conservative,
very "biblical" ex-husband was also an abusive control freak with both
her and the kids.
I have one child. She has a younger half-brother who managed to become
addicted to heroin at the tender age of 12. His younger brother is not
an addict, but he has...um...issues. Their mother is bipolar and was not
treated for her condition until the older boy was about 2. My daughter's
father believes that men go to work and women rear the kids, so he was
not involved in the childrearing except to the extent of "wait till your
father gets home."
In the latter case, when the school tried to intervene, all hell broke
loose, because "they don't have the right to raise [sic] my children"
said their mother.
Don't try to blame this problem on "the liberals" (whoever they are)
because I have tons of empirical evidence to the contrary.
rl
Rick
I let them do most everything they want to and trust them. What's great aout
America is you do have the right to raise your children as you see fit as
well as does Leythos. I do not want my children being stalked or worse by
someone on the internet. Unfortunately even at 18 children do not possess
all the mental maturity to make good sound decisions. This was proven by
raising the drinking age from 18 to 21. Unfortunately we as parents must
sometimes put our foot down and let them be pissed at a decision we make that
some day they will appreciate. Let's let this go to rest. It is true that
many laws have changed to take away power from the government in raising your
children and I think that is good. I am a conservative but also more toward
the middle. I think too much government in your life is not a good thing.
It'll usually cost you more, you'll get less and ususally get teh opposite of
what you want becuase of the red tape.
In the quest for knowledge.
AnthonyB
The answer is yes there is a simple way to do this via group policy, however
if you do it the simple way by simply just blocking the ability to clear the
history, you leave many simple ways for other programs to do it for them.
I have several user accounts on my pc, one parents account, which has admin
acess that my spouse and I use, and one for each of the kids with user
rights. I have restricted many of the tabs in control panels, and IE and
they cannot install anything, they need me there to install it for them then
I grant them access to use them. Unfortunately for you none of this is
simple, and I work with group policy and large networks everyday.
If you want a simple solution that does not require you to be a technical
expert I recommend that you do install something like net nanny etc. it's
simple and works effictively for minimal effort.
*********************side note
I also recommend that you save the hosts file located at
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm, as per security staff at microsoft
to your <windows dir>\systems32\drivers\etc folder, read the associated
website to find out why, and then restrict access ot the etc folder so the
kids can't modify it.
AnthonyB
molesteres for years, impersonating children she would infiltrate these rings
so she could find out how they were coaxed into it bit by bit, their methods
and why they were successufl, many of the victims were from happy households,
however the major factors that the victims had in common were.
1)All hour, or long term unsupervised, unfetterd access to the internet.
2)All hour, or long term unsupervised access to a mobile phone
3)Access to leave their home without detection, or with little chance of
being caught out if giving reasons.
I would never let my 7 year old walk around unsupervised why would I let him
on the net and the chat rooms unsupervised, I wouldn't let my 13 year old out
without knowing exactly where they had been, why would I let them on the
internet without knowing exactly where they had been. I don't want to know
exactly what they have been doing and saying to their friends etc. but I want
to know who those friends are and where they have been.
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote:
> Paul Ber wrote:
> > Talking to kids is fine, but they still get curious and do things you
> > tell them not to do, so you always have to have a way to check up on
> > them. If you think you can just talk to them and everything is going
> > to be ok, you've got your head in the clouds. Sorry.
>
> I think Alias is right and you are wrong.
>
> If you start talking to your kids early--about everything--they will
> keep you informed of their activities. And if you realize that part of
> becoming an individual and an adult is experimentation, you'll perhaps
> be a little less heavy-handed in your approach, i.e., instead of "If you
> don't stay off bad sites, I'm taking the computer away," try "Let's talk
> about what you saw on Ogrish this afternoon."
>
> If you play cat and mouse games with your kids, they will become ever
> more clever and more devious mice.
>
> My daughter is 21. I wouldn't do everything she does, but she does
> nothing that does not meet with my approval, because her core values are
> good. And she's not afraid to talk with me about anything.
>
> Good luck figuring out how to spy on your children.
>
> rl
> --
> Rhonda Lea Kirk
>
> I've been through some awful worries, and
> some of them actually happened. Mark Twain
>
>
>
AnthonyB
porn surfing habits from their wives. I don't condone their porn surfing,
but there are some truths out there and that's one of them, there would be an
outrage.
"Paul Ber" wrote:
> I'm going to make this the last post. You MVP's out there that have more
> clout that people like me with Microsoft. You should go to Bill G and say;
> You can become the Good Guy of The World. Just get rid of the Delete
> Button in IE (for History), and make the History folder password lockable,
> and every parent will make Bill their God Father to their children.
>
> No cost, no peaking over their shoulder, no having to put the computer out
> in an open space, no nothing. Again, no software is bulletproof. If a
> parent
> buys your $100 item, they are likely to get passive and never check their
> kids,
> thinking the software is blocking everything. Not true. Parents need to
> check.
> And it should be simple and free.
>
> Just check the History folder 2 or 3 times a week and cut the kid off if he
> goes to a bad place. This is what I did with my son from the age of 8 to
> 18.
> After that I stopped checking because he went off to college.
> Guess what, he never went to bad places once he knew I could check up on
> him and he knew I was doing it. That's what parents need to do.
>
> Paul Ber
>
>
> "BillW" <x...@xxx.com> wrote in message
> news:0f2dnYcb7MB...@comcast.com...
> > Paul,
> >
> > Your concern is extremely valid. I am of the age that I now discuss
> > concerns such as yours with my daughter about my granddaughter's baby
> > sitters and what can she do when my granddaughter is of the age that she
> > can use a computer and use the internet. If I had school age children at
> > home, I would take every measure and use every tool to make sure that they
> > not fall into the hands of a predator. This is nothing to play with and
> > Polly Ana statements that all you have to do is talk to your kids is not
> > responsible. It's your responsibility to protect your kids and that's
> > what you're trying to do. "Do not speak to strangers" is not enough.
> > These people that prey on your kids are the best at what they do and we
> > have to protect our children from this scum.
> >
> > There are several good monitors that you can run on your computer. One we
> > have used at the office is Spector Pro (product name). Do a Google search
> > and go to the Spector Pro site and read about it's functionality. It
> > costs about $100, but it's an investment that falls in to the category of
> > seat belts, door locks, etc. I feel that it's a requirement in this day
> > and age. The software is not detectable and will show you the websites
> > that were visited, key strokes, IM discussions, etc. I think it's
> > important to use the best tool possible and the History folder (whether
> > you can lock it or not) is not the best tool.
> >
> > Good luck and congratulations on an effort to protect your children. By
> > all means don't be concerned about invasion of their privacy or a concern
> > that they might do something that you would not approve of. This is not
> > an issue of communications - this is a father being responsible and
> > protecting his family. Again, good job and follow through with what
> > you're trying to do.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> > "Paul Ber" <427...@charter.net> wrote in message
> > news:_R62g.9$nJ...@fe05.lga...
> >> It seems to me, if one could password lock the History
> >> folder so that there would be no way of deleting anything
> >> from it; a parent could sit down at the computer in the
> >> evening and check every site their children had gone to
> >> during the day.
> >>
> >> If bad site had be gone to, then the parent could tell
> >> Johnny, if he continues to go to bad sites, he will be off
> >> the Internet.
> >>
> >> Seems simple to me. Can this be done so the child can't
> >> wipe out the History folder ?
> >>
> >> Paul Ber
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
xfile
And how did you know I surf "bad" sites all the time, such as this one? :)
"AnthonyB" <Anth...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B9759489-6B54-4C9B...@microsoft.com...
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> Have you read the recommendations that came from the lady who studied
> child molesteres for years, impersonating children she would
> infiltrate these rings so she could find out how they were coaxed
> into it bit by bit, their methods and why they were successufl, many
> of the victims were from happy households, however the major factors
> that the victims had in common were.
>
> 1)All hour, or long term unsupervised, unfetterd access to the
> internet. 2)All hour, or long term unsupervised access to a mobile
> phone 3)Access to leave their home without detection, or with little
> chance of being caught out if giving reasons.
>
> I would never let my 7 year old walk around unsupervised why would I
> let him on the net and the chat rooms unsupervised, I wouldn't let my
> 13 year old out without knowing exactly where they had been, why
> would I let them on the internet without knowing exactly where they
> had been. I don't want to know exactly what they have been doing and
> saying to their friends etc. but I want to know who those friends are
> and where they have been.
Y'know, people who use electronics to babysit their children will reap
what they sow.
Using the internet to keep ones children occupied is no different than
using television. No one said that limiting a child's time on the
computer is bad.
But if you play Sherlock Holmes with your kids instead of forming a
relationship with them that includes dialog on all subjects, you will
pay for it. Teaching kids that violating someone's privacy is okay is a
bad lesson for later life. Teaching kids that he who has the power makes
the rules--regardless of how onerous, burdensome and oppressive--sets
them up for exploitation. Parents just don't realize that the habits we
form early in life--how we react to all classes of situations--follow us
forever.
And sometimes parents just don't think.
When I was 12, a Princeton University student lived up the road. One day
when I was riding my bicycle, the chain fell off and when he saw me by
the side of the road, he came out and fixed it. Why did he take an
interest in a 12-year old? Because he had a passion, and he loves to
teach and because (from what I've read recently) befriends others
easily. He offered to take me birdwatching. This is a rural area (even
now, I see foxes and deer and wild turkey and hawks in the woods when I
look out my bedroom window), so it was good for that.
Anyway, my mother said no.
I managed to stay friends with him for the time he was here, and he
taught me a lot of interesting things in spite of the limitations. I
googled him the other day, and he is now one of the most highly
acclaimed ornithologists in his field--oft-published and internationally
known.
And I had and lost an opportunity to learn from him in the area for
which he has become famous.
If parents are going to limit their children, they need to be very sure
about the limits they place, or the opportunities they could foreclose
are incalculable. And they may also fail to recognize the real dangers
to their children, because most often those dangers come from trusted
sources.
The lady you cite was studying a particular phenomenon, and those are
her conclusions for that particular subgroup. But most children are
molested by close friends and family members, not by strangers.
rl
AnthonyB
I never said that I used electronics to replace me or babysit my children,
it's about making it easier and improving quality of surfing without getting
annoying pop ups and ads with naked woman and using it as a set of things to
help. It's also about alerting me if my kids try and surf at 12pm at night
without my knowledge to sites they don't understand. I would always say that
having a relationship with your children is most important, way more
important than what I have talked about technically. If my restricitions
told me that my child was trying to access stuff like that or trying to
sneak, I would openly discuss it and explain it with them not punish them or
get angry etc. As my children get older, they will get more trust, more
access to the outside world, more room to make their mistakes for themselves,
but little by little, I am not about to expose my 7 year old, to the internet
unsupervised and unrestricted, yet I want him to start learning about it now,
so he is up to date with computers.
The other day I was googling some sites and mistakenly clicked on a site
which seemed to be fairly legit and the ads down the side were from an adults
single site with woman on all fours facing away from me. The content was not
so bad mostly about music, band etc. stuff my 13 year old would google. And
it's not the end of the world if they had come across them and I'm not saying
they will be scarred for life, but as Leythos said the restrictions can
actually improve the quality of surfing, I don't want to see woman on all
fours while trying to read about my fave bands. It's one thing if I go
searching for Porn it's quite another when it's forced upon me.
On a side note I played cat and mouse with restrictions on my dad since I
was 13 and it became more of a game than a restrictive device it helped me
learn about the computer and those same theories I learnt to beat my dad to
more access are the same underlying understandings that gave me the expertise
and love of computers which is the industry I am in today.
To tell you the truth this is a technical column if we want to really talk
about parenting there about one million parenting forums we can move to
discuss this further, the guy asked a technical question on a technical
website, I think it is fair enough he gets a technical response not a
parenting one.
"Leythos" wrote:
> In article <4bufa5F...@individual.net>, rhon...@gmail.com says...
> > Y'know, people who use electronics to babysit their children will reap
> > what they sow.
> >
> > Using the internet to keep ones children occupied is no different than
> > using television. No one said that limiting a child's time on the
> > computer is bad.
>
> And today, my kids have to do research on the internet, as required by
> their teachers, to research all sorts of things - Math, Health,
> History... While I would like to sit over the shoulder every time they
> are on the net, to explain things they see, protect them from clicking
> on bad links that appear to be good links, from other interactions they
> should not have to experience, the firewall and web blocking makes this
> easier for me and a better experience for them.
>
> Most parents, at least the ones asking about protection, don't use the
> Internet as a babysitter, they allow their kids access for all the same
> reason we have access - to learn, to interact with many different
> subjects, etc....
>
> Your job as a Parent is to educate, raise, protect your kids at least
> until they are 18 (some until much later), and not using electronic
> means to protect them (and you) from internet threats is just plain
> stupid.
>
> --
>
> spam9...@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
Wesley Vogel
--
Hope this helps. Let us know.
Wes
MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
In news:A391C5A1-6040-43EA...@microsoft.com,
AnthonyB <Anth...@discussions.microsoft.com> hunted and pecked:
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> The other day I was googling some sites and mistakenly clicked on a
> site which seemed to be fairly legit and the ads down the side were
> from an adults single site with woman on all fours facing away from
> me.
You can set your google search preferences to prevent this.
I don't get pop-up ads from porn sites--even on the rare occasions I
view porn sites. I don't get pop-up ads from sites, actually.
Maybe it's not the kids we should be worried about.
rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be
the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than
under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may
sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those
who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do
so with the approval of their own conscience. C.S. Lewis
-K- The One And Only
are still bearing grudges and reading this...
Here's my take.
You people are immature. Cant you just stick to answering the question
instead of going into a debate about good parenting skills.?I was trying to
solve my own technical issues until I came across this. Couldn't help but
give my two cents worth.
So what? You think that a few posts and a few links are going to change a
parent's concept and mindset of parenting. (Im not supporting either side
here.)
By the way, Im 19. And I have great parents.
-K-
Rock
Who exactly are you talking to? You haven't quoted any of the messages to
which you refer, so if this is truly a year old thread, folks aren't going
to see the other posts in this thread. In other words, you're talking to
yourself.
--
Rock [MVP - User/Shell]
-K- The One And Only
last LONGER than I thought. anyways glad this guy closed it. Cheers
-K-
Shenan Stanley
--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Ronnie Vernon MVP
posted over 8 months ago on May 4, 2006???
< By the way, Im 19.
OK, I guess that explains it. :)
--
Ronnie Vernon
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User
"-K- The One And Only" <KTheOne...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:B7224CEA-B60A-4369...@microsoft.com...
Poprivet
or quotes, so I'm not sure. However, that said, you're right. You'll find
that over time the "culture" of newsgroups varies and the swing toward
condscension and ego is still in force, as evidenced by a couple of the
reponses alreayd made here. And by MVPs yet, who have violated their own
terms to hold MVP status via the responses.
ON the other hand, you have to have a thick skin on any newsgroup as there
are always detractors, trolls and narcissists who have to get in their own
two cents worth with off topic and untagged as such, missives.
It's mostly a case of patience and perseverence on newsgroups. Since it's a
peer situation they have bad days just like you do, and there's almost
always a need to pick thru the posts for real data. Unfortunate, but true.
Personally, they can call me anything but late for supper if they've given
me a usable response to my problem. It's not worth letting negative remarks
get to a person.
Enjoy,
Pop`