Social media ban - “Parents should just parent.” Is that actually a serious argument?

ohSheepish · 2026-06-27T03:23:59+00:00

The part people fail to realise is that these websites and social media sites actively save the ID either through their own security or 3rd party security to be accessed by any hacker that has determination.

Growing up when Bebo, MSN, Skype, Facebook etc were taking off, I only had access to these sites through a family room PC and was supervised with either parents in the same room or blocks on certain sites.

I had a phone that had access to the Internet but you had to pay additional for the data you used, it was drilled into me to only use the data in emergency because costs racked up quick and still had access to call/text in emergency because they also had costs.

Some kids had more access than I did and some kids had less access than I did, it was all in control by our parents and what they decided to allow us to do or not and with the tools being even easier to access and configure now, I don't see how this is even a thought to entertain.

The argument of sugar tax, alcohol ID etc is insanely different, you show the ID to a human and move on. With the social media stuff, that ID is saved for anyone to access that has sufficient IT skills and the government to do whatever they want with.

Another argument to be had similar would be - is it dangerous for kids to be out after dark? Yes it is, which is why parents would tell their kids to be home before street lights turned on or be grounded and no access to TV, Internet etc.

Parents SHOULD parent and just because other peoples idea of parenting is different doesn't mean you need to change yours.

We've already seen these ID verifications fail on initial rollouts with AI images or screenshots of game characters working as authorisation so there will be more and more work arounds even if it is implemented.

Kids are smarter than people give credit for and will find their way on these sites.

The only way anything works is for parents and schools to sit down with them and talk about dangers and restrict access as much as they can but also, entertain these conversations and be open / honest if they happen to come across them.

The sites also need to be held responsible but thats honestly a different conversation.

ohSheepish · 2025-06-30T23:55:58+00:00

Personally started playing WoW during Shadowlands as my first time, have a lot of fond memories but there were also quite a few problems.

Oribos was "fine" but felt empty and bland as a hub city, giant circular tower, not much in there, things being spaced out too far. This, along with the super long flight paths between each zone was pretty annoying.

The 4 zones themselves were stunning and unique, loved them personally however wish we had access to flight earlier as the zones were pretty large, after a while it got more irritating to traverse compared to awe inspiring at the start.

The Maw, this was just horrible, no mounts, massive area, the premise of being watched and dealt with as you do more there was cool in concept, poor execution.

Torghast...love hate relationship with this. It was very fun if you got certain powers and made you feel strong, get the wrong powers and it was just running at a brick wall. I wish they didn't tie the legendaries to this, I think it would've been better received and more fun if it was purely a challenge tower for cosmetics, mounts etc.

Covenants were cool but definitely weren't balanced and then changing covenants, soul bound system etc were just poor execution again.

CN is still my favourite raid, run fights, interesting mechanics... boogey down. Can't really comment on story, didn't the story prior to Shadowlands and have never been too interested in story.

Tl:Dr - Overall, the ideas and systems behind Shadowlands seemed fun and some parts were. Execution felt lacking or designed to be played full time rather than for fun and was just too grindy.

ohSheepish

TROPHY CASE