Larian Studios Forums General Chat Chat (Anything) the line between parenting and schooling

I think the key is not force or reasoning - it's consequence

Most education failures are the result of a lack of consequence. The one and same issue is treated differently, in accordance with 'daily form' or, between parents, due to differing priorities or values.

And, in a figurative way, you learn best when it hurts. By that I do not mean beating, but living the consequence of ones doing. If the child is told not to touch the fire, because it may hurt, the child will touch it anyway - and desist in future, because of the experience. Same goes with other, more abstract things - there is a limit up to what you can, or should, be protective - the best teacher is own experience. (Though one can, and should, steer and mitigate the hurting experience)

On moral issues that does not work that easily. Here the best teacher - imo - is living example, which would put the main burden on parents, naturally. I was quite shocked to see a couple that rather often disputed amaong themselves, in quite cynical and offensive verbiage (no force though), where both were aghast that their child talked back to them, in what they considered a 'terrible tone it must have picked up in school'.

Children don't do as you say, they do as you do...

Übereil

Actually, I had two sets of great parents. All four of them weren't perfect and made mistakes, so I try to draw positives from all four of them.

@ Mick -> u've double the blessings, dude. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

@ Ube -> your last post shows wisdom. u have hope to be a good parent one day. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

@ Glance -> once again, the wise has spoken. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> dang right, consequences teach most effectively. but at the same time, it can have adverse effect. such as one major failure (such as failing a major exam) can cause a child to fear failure so much that he/she will refuse to try again.

living example is one heck of a way to teach but only if the parents are willing to do so. any one that does not comply to it will condemn almost the whole effort. i recalled when i was young, my father warned me & my siblings not to end up like him smoking while he smoked away. today all of my brothers smoke while only my sister & i don't. let me tell u the truth; i almost end up smoking too! so yes, living example can be very effective but one slip is all it takes as children pick up even the most subtle things parents do/say & dish it back to the parents.

On the topic, I was shown another article today: Mother faces jail for child's music downloads

In the piracy case, I feel that it should be partly the schools responsibilty to teach children about piracy laws. These things hardly existed back when our parents were kids. They've never had to learn them either. Sure they had laws regarding recorded media such as tapes, but they never had concerns on the scale that the Internet allows. This is the first generation to really be stung by anti-piracy laws.

When I was a child, I used to pirate left, right and centre. I didn't know it was illegal. I just thought it was convinient. Now I know better so I don't pirate. I can see that the products I use are worth the cost, and I understand why piracy is illegal. I can teach my kids to not pirate. I bet you they pirate anyway, just to rebel against me...

So if the mother goes to jail and loses her job... Who will support the child? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/think.gif" alt="" />

Gotta agree with you on that one. Kids think "It can't be too bad, if they do it."



Here's my take on this.

1) The mother should have done a better job monitoring what her kid was doing online. Sure, she is computer illiterate, but she should have taken the time to learn a little something about computers before getting her little girl one.

2) Making the mother go to jail is ridiculous. The recording industry shouldn't be so damn bullheaded and should be willing to work out a compromise or something.

3) Little Emily should get a job.

Tax payers, of course.

Unfortunately, little Emily is under the legal working age...

And even if she wasn't, she should still be in school. She's 14 ffs!

Übereil

I didn't say a full time job. Just a part time gig for a few hours after school or on the weekends. You can work in the US at 14.

And even if she was under the legal working age, there are plenty of tasks that young teens can do as a little job: babysitting, newspapers/adds delivery, yard upkeep tasks, etc...
Having the mother go to jail because of that is ridiculous. But I can hardly believe that the kid really "didn't know it was wrong" either. Yes, everyone around her was doing it but it's more like to render something wrong commonplace than not knowing that it is wrong, imho.

The issues about copyright are so puzzling. In any case, all this story must be very heavy on little Emily's young shoulders... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

The music industry hits record highs in profit every year it seems...they can kiss my @ss GO EMILY GO!!! (besides I shouldnt have to buy an album when there is only one good song on it that will be overplayed and get annoying anyway!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/memad.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/memad.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/memad.gif" alt="" />)

Maybe I'm a bit particall, but as a consumer I feel the music industry should have done something to adapt to internet. Now instead, they put valuable money (which SHOULD be used to produce better music) on trying to get the downloaders. If they managed to get a good way to download the music (for a price that we consumers feel is payable) legally I think the illegal download will go down. But that's just me. And this topic is getting <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/offtopic.gif" alt="" />, so back to school, ok?

Übereil

Then you probably don't need the song.



There are several ways to download music legally. There are several sites you can go to and pay about $.99 a song, which would actually be cheaper than buying the album.

I don't pay 200 kr for an album. And I don't pay 10 for a song. Unfortunantlly, this is what music costs nowadays (in Sweden). Since the record companys answer to pepole downloading is to raise the prices to earn as much (or, as I see it, suck the pepole who don't have the possibility to download it out). This is not a sollution of the problem, this will just make iot whorse. If you didn't download music before, you sure do it now, because of the prices.

Übereil

Not true. I still buy music.

What better solution is there for merging with the internet than having places where you can download music cheaply? It seems pretty logical to me. I'd be interested to hear some other proposals though.

You're not most pepole <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />. And I buy music too. Mostlly because my musictaste is hopleslly out of date, to the music I find is pretty cheap.

And I don't know of a place where you can download music legally/cheaplly. And that's the problem, if I don't know a place, I suspect most pepole don't know a palce either. If most pepole knew that you can log in at downloadmusic.com (or whatever the site should be called) and download your music cheap (this is still a problem i Sweden), then illegal download should go down. If you changed the general view of illegal download to that it's wrong too, then it should go down drasticlly. Maybe put up a one-day tryingtime/song, so you don't have to try right away? Even better, then you can listen to the music and see if you like it. If you do, then you buy it. This means the prices won't have to be so low too.

Übereil

http://www.walmart.com/music?path=0%3A4104&dept=4104 for example. Walmart advertises it quite a bit. AOL also allows you to download music. Plus, I believe Napster is back as a pay place.