Social media is designed to be addictive; known harmful. Why do your kids have it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread sounds like a lot of parents of younger children. The socialization of teens is pretty different from the socialization of elementary schoolers. They have different needs and different levels of autonomy. Banning your kids from any kind of social media absolutely WILL cause them to be excluded socially. Is this an awesome thing to have happen? Of course not. But the reality is that if you don't let your kids use Discord and all their friends are socializing via Discord out of school, your kid will miss that socialization. That's a choice you can make, but recognize that there will be social consequences for that choice.

People with older kids are generally a lot better at understanding that nuance than the people whose kids are still in elementary school. The rules that one has for a 6yo are less appropriate for a 16yo, which the parents of 6yo almost never seem to understand.

None of this addresses the facts:

- it’s successfully engineered to be highly addictive

- it’s harmful to teen brains, and

- everyone gives it to their kids anyway.

Everyone either allows or forces all sorts of choices on teens every single day that are either not in the best interest of physical/mental health or are even actively harmful!

How early does your teen wake up for school or sports? How often is your teen riding in a car rather than walking or biking? How many hours of completely unstructured free time do your children have each day? How often do you allow your teens out alone in the world completely unsupervised and with no quick way to contact them? And so on.

Social media is a low hanging fruit for people to judge other parents without ever having to seriously examine some of the potential consequences of their own less than ideal choices, IMO.

DP - what makes you think those of us concerned about social media ignore issues like sleep, car riding, etc.? IME, most parents don’t bother to look at real risks like these, because that would require setting limits with kids and they don’t want to do that.

Your response makes me think you ignore those issues based on the fact that you didn’t actually answer the questions and you don’t want to admit how badly you’re failing your kids in THOSE areas. Easier to turn the subject back to those awful parents who allow social media!

Sure, Heather, you’ve caught me now!

Except that I’m the only parent of (11 year old) DD’s friends who won’t let her ride in the front seat. Or give her a phone with unfettered access to YouTube, TikTok, etc. Or who limits sleepovers because she needs her sleep. But sure, you go on with your brilliant assumptions!

You have once again avoided answering the questions.

How often is she riding in a car rather than walking or biking? What time is she waking up in the morning to go to school? What time does she go to sleep at night? What’s her diet like? How much unstructured free time does she have? How often is she going outside?

The restrictions you put on her sound like they’re mostly for show. So other parents can SEE what a good parent you are. But that still has nothing to do with her actual day to day existence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't. I'm hoping they thank me later. Oldest not yet in high school, though, which is when it may be hard to hold out.

My closest childhood friend works for one of the big Silicon Valley companies. Her kids go to "Forest School" and she tries not to let them see the parents on devices at all. She's seen into the belly of the beast and knows enough to be scared.

I have two in high school in fcps. Neither has it.
They are doing just fine.

That’s cool. So are all the kids I know who do have it. We can share anecdotes all day.

Sure Jan

I know for some strange reason you want to believe all teens are depressed and mentally ill, but they just aren’t. Sorry to…disappoint you?

DP. You think if a kid isn’t showing signs of full blown depression or mental illness that social media isn’t possibly affecting their mental wellbeing?

No, but neither is it accurate to say that ALL or even MOST teens who have social media are negatively affected by it. It simply isn't true. The people asserting that either don't have teens at all, or their teens are not on social media, so they have no idea.

Depends on how you define “negatively affected.”

So your oldest is 8? 10? I know your type.

Why do you assume that? My oldest is 15.

If they don’t have social media, you are not qualified to remark on how it’s affecting their mental health.

Geez, you REALLY love social media for your kids (and likely yourself). I know your type, too.

Yet here you are. So much hand wringing!

Sigh.

If you believe DCUMAD is in any way comparable to the social media defendants being sued by 30 separate States Attorneys General, then you are truly stupid.

Perhaps TikTok has rotted your brain?

DP but please explain the difference. This site is addictive and a waste of time and is generally negative. (For example, if you were discussing this issue with PP would you call her “truly stupid” to her face? I should certainly hope not!)

This form of social media (and it absolutely IS social media) is not inherently better just because it’s the form that YOU’RE addicted to.

[Anonymous]

Why do you have social media, OP? Kids have it for the same reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread sounds like a lot of parents of younger children. The socialization of teens is pretty different from the socialization of elementary schoolers. They have different needs and different levels of autonomy. Banning your kids from any kind of social media absolutely WILL cause them to be excluded socially. Is this an awesome thing to have happen? Of course not. But the reality is that if you don't let your kids use Discord and all their friends are socializing via Discord out of school, your kid will miss that socialization. That's a choice you can make, but recognize that there will be social consequences for that choice.

People with older kids are generally a lot better at understanding that nuance than the people whose kids are still in elementary school. The rules that one has for a 6yo are less appropriate for a 16yo, which the parents of 6yo almost never seem to understand.

None of this addresses the facts:

- it’s successfully engineered to be highly addictive

- it’s harmful to teen brains, and

- everyone gives it to their kids anyway.

Everyone either allows or forces all sorts of choices on teens every single day that are either not in the best interest of physical/mental health or are even actively harmful!

How early does your teen wake up for school or sports? How often is your teen riding in a car rather than walking or biking? How many hours of completely unstructured free time do your children have each day? How often do you allow your teens out alone in the world completely unsupervised and with no quick way to contact them? And so on.

Social media is a low hanging fruit for people to judge other parents without ever having to seriously examine some of the potential consequences of their own less than ideal choices, IMO.

DP - what makes you think those of us concerned about social media ignore issues like sleep, car riding, etc.? IME, most parents don’t bother to look at real risks like these, because that would require setting limits with kids and they don’t want to do that.

Your response makes me think you ignore those issues based on the fact that you didn’t actually answer the questions and you don’t want to admit how badly you’re failing your kids in THOSE areas. Easier to turn the subject back to those awful parents who allow social media!

Sure, Heather, you’ve caught me now!

Except that I’m the only parent of (11 year old) DD’s friends who won’t let her ride in the front seat. Or give her a phone with unfettered access to YouTube, TikTok, etc. Or who limits sleepovers because she needs her sleep. But sure, you go on with your brilliant assumptions!

You have once again avoided answering the questions.

How often is she riding in a car rather than walking or biking? What time is she waking up in the morning to go to school? What time does she go to sleep at night? What’s her diet like? How much unstructured free time does she have? How often is she going outside?

The restrictions you put on her sound like they’re mostly for show. So other parents can SEE what a good parent you are. But that still has nothing to do with her actual day to day existence.

Lol - guess what? Answering a set of increasingly intrusive questions by some internet rando would be "mostly for show." Hard pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do you have social media, OP? Kids have it for the same reasons.

Why do many adults avoid social media? Kids should avoid it for the same reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread sounds like a lot of parents of younger children. The socialization of teens is pretty different from the socialization of elementary schoolers. They have different needs and different levels of autonomy. Banning your kids from any kind of social media absolutely WILL cause them to be excluded socially. Is this an awesome thing to have happen? Of course not. But the reality is that if you don't let your kids use Discord and all their friends are socializing via Discord out of school, your kid will miss that socialization. That's a choice you can make, but recognize that there will be social consequences for that choice.

People with older kids are generally a lot better at understanding that nuance than the people whose kids are still in elementary school. The rules that one has for a 6yo are less appropriate for a 16yo, which the parents of 6yo almost never seem to understand.

None of this addresses the facts:

- it’s successfully engineered to be highly addictive

- it’s harmful to teen brains, and

- everyone gives it to their kids anyway.

Everyone either allows or forces all sorts of choices on teens every single day that are either not in the best interest of physical/mental health or are even actively harmful!

How early does your teen wake up for school or sports? How often is your teen riding in a car rather than walking or biking? How many hours of completely unstructured free time do your children have each day? How often do you allow your teens out alone in the world completely unsupervised and with no quick way to contact them? And so on.

Social media is a low hanging fruit for people to judge other parents without ever having to seriously examine some of the potential consequences of their own less than ideal choices, IMO.

DP - what makes you think those of us concerned about social media ignore issues like sleep, car riding, etc.? IME, most parents don’t bother to look at real risks like these, because that would require setting limits with kids and they don’t want to do that.

Your response makes me think you ignore those issues based on the fact that you didn’t actually answer the questions and you don’t want to admit how badly you’re failing your kids in THOSE areas. Easier to turn the subject back to those awful parents who allow social media!

Sure, Heather, you’ve caught me now!

Except that I’m the only parent of (11 year old) DD’s friends who won’t let her ride in the front seat. Or give her a phone with unfettered access to YouTube, TikTok, etc. Or who limits sleepovers because she needs her sleep. But sure, you go on with your brilliant assumptions!

You have once again avoided answering the questions.

How often is she riding in a car rather than walking or biking? What time is she waking up in the morning to go to school? What time does she go to sleep at night? What’s her diet like? How much unstructured free time does she have? How often is she going outside?

The restrictions you put on her sound like they’re mostly for show. So other parents can SEE what a good parent you are. But that still has nothing to do with her actual day to day existence.

Lol - guess what? Answering a set of increasingly intrusive questions by some internet rando would be "mostly for show." Hard pass.

I can see that my questions have triggered you. Maybe spend some time thinking deeply about why that is, and less time judging the parenting skills of “internet randos”. Good luck!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you have social media, OP? Kids have it for the same reasons.

Why do many adults avoid social media? Kids should avoid it for the same reasons.

What gets me is the actual adults who are on TikTok.

What kind of immature imbecile is too stupid to know they shouldn’t be on TikTok?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread sounds like a lot of parents of younger children. The socialization of teens is pretty different from the socialization of elementary schoolers. They have different needs and different levels of autonomy. Banning your kids from any kind of social media absolutely WILL cause them to be excluded socially. Is this an awesome thing to have happen? Of course not. But the reality is that if you don't let your kids use Discord and all their friends are socializing via Discord out of school, your kid will miss that socialization. That's a choice you can make, but recognize that there will be social consequences for that choice.

People with older kids are generally a lot better at understanding that nuance than the people whose kids are still in elementary school. The rules that one has for a 6yo are less appropriate for a 16yo, which the parents of 6yo almost never seem to understand.

None of this addresses the facts:

- it’s successfully engineered to be highly addictive

- it’s harmful to teen brains, and

- everyone gives it to their kids anyway.

Everyone either allows or forces all sorts of choices on teens every single day that are either not in the best interest of physical/mental health or are even actively harmful!

How early does your teen wake up for school or sports? How often is your teen riding in a car rather than walking or biking? How many hours of completely unstructured free time do your children have each day? How often do you allow your teens out alone in the world completely unsupervised and with no quick way to contact them? And so on.

Social media is a low hanging fruit for people to judge other parents without ever having to seriously examine some of the potential consequences of their own less than ideal choices, IMO.

DP - what makes you think those of us concerned about social media ignore issues like sleep, car riding, etc.? IME, most parents don’t bother to look at real risks like these, because that would require setting limits with kids and they don’t want to do that.

Your response makes me think you ignore those issues based on the fact that you didn’t actually answer the questions and you don’t want to admit how badly you’re failing your kids in THOSE areas. Easier to turn the subject back to those awful parents who allow social media!

Sure, Heather, you’ve caught me now!

Except that I’m the only parent of (11 year old) DD’s friends who won’t let her ride in the front seat. Or give her a phone with unfettered access to YouTube, TikTok, etc. Or who limits sleepovers because she needs her sleep. But sure, you go on with your brilliant assumptions!

You have once again avoided answering the questions.

How often is she riding in a car rather than walking or biking? What time is she waking up in the morning to go to school? What time does she go to sleep at night? What’s her diet like? How much unstructured free time does she have? How often is she going outside?

The restrictions you put on her sound like they’re mostly for show. So other parents can SEE what a good parent you are. But that still has nothing to do with her actual day to day existence.

Lol - guess what? Answering a set of increasingly intrusive questions by some internet rando would be "mostly for show." Hard pass.

I can see that my questions have triggered you. Maybe spend some time thinking deeply about why that is, and less time judging the parenting skills of “internet randos”. Good luck!

So much projection. So.Much.Projection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't. I'm hoping they thank me later. Oldest not yet in high school, though, which is when it may be hard to hold out.

My closest childhood friend works for one of the big Silicon Valley companies. Her kids go to "Forest School" and she tries not to let them see the parents on devices at all. She's seen into the belly of the beast and knows enough to be scared.

I have two in high school in fcps. Neither has it.
They are doing just fine.

That’s cool. So are all the kids I know who do have it. We can share anecdotes all day.

Sure Jan

I know for some strange reason you want to believe all teens are depressed and mentally ill, but they just aren’t. Sorry to…disappoint you?

DP. You think if a kid isn’t showing signs of full blown depression or mental illness that social media isn’t possibly affecting their mental wellbeing?

No, but neither is it accurate to say that ALL or even MOST teens who have social media are negatively affected by it. It simply isn't true. The people asserting that either don't have teens at all, or their teens are not on social media, so they have no idea.

Depends on how you define “negatively affected.”

So your oldest is 8? 10? I know your type.

Why do you assume that? My oldest is 15.

If they don’t have social media, you are not qualified to remark on how it’s affecting their mental health.

Geez, you REALLY love social media for your kids (and likely yourself). I know your type, too.

Yet here you are. So much hand wringing!

Sigh.

If you believe DCUMAD is in any way comparable to the social media defendants being sued by 30 separate States Attorneys General, then you are truly stupid.

Perhaps TikTok has rotted your brain?

DP but please explain the difference. This site is addictive and a waste of time and is generally negative. (For example, if you were discussing this issue with PP would you call her “truly stupid” to her face? I should certainly hope not!)

This form of social media (and it absolutely IS social media) is not inherently better just because it’s the form that YOU’RE addicted to.

OK; I wrote the prior response so I’ll bite:

Sure, you can loosely call DCUMAD “social media” - but the similarities end there.

- algorithm: Jeff’s board does not have one. Moreover, even if he did, Jeff is nothing like the highly-paid, evil-geniuses behind SM such as TikTok, which carefully studies your viewing habits, then purposefully DIRECTS you to new posts/videos to intentionally keep you on the site. No, DCUMAD is completely different: you and you-alone decide where to go on this board.

- tracking: DCUMAD does not do that to you. This site does not even have log-on names for 99% of users

- big data: this site is not connected to it. All other SM is deeply intertwined with big data

- selling your info: this site does not sell your data to 3rd parties. All other SM does.

- content ownership: other SM’s own the content you creat and post over there. You did not know? Yes - it’s right in the terms you agreed to on Insta, FB, etc - but you never bothered to read every word, did you.

There are too many other differences to list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread sounds like a lot of parents of younger children. The socialization of teens is pretty different from the socialization of elementary schoolers. They have different needs and different levels of autonomy. Banning your kids from any kind of social media absolutely WILL cause them to be excluded socially. Is this an awesome thing to have happen? Of course not. But the reality is that if you don't let your kids use Discord and all their friends are socializing via Discord out of school, your kid will miss that socialization. That's a choice you can make, but recognize that there will be social consequences for that choice.

People with older kids are generally a lot better at understanding that nuance than the people whose kids are still in elementary school. The rules that one has for a 6yo are less appropriate for a 16yo, which the parents of 6yo almost never seem to understand.

None of this addresses the facts:

- it’s successfully engineered to be highly addictive

- it’s harmful to teen brains, and

- everyone gives it to their kids anyway.

Everyone either allows or forces all sorts of choices on teens every single day that are either not in the best interest of physical/mental health or are even actively harmful!

How early does your teen wake up for school or sports? How often is your teen riding in a car rather than walking or biking? How many hours of completely unstructured free time do your children have each day? How often do you allow your teens out alone in the world completely unsupervised and with no quick way to contact them? And so on.

Social media is a low hanging fruit for people to judge other parents without ever having to seriously examine some of the potential consequences of their own less than ideal choices, IMO.

DP - what makes you think those of us concerned about social media ignore issues like sleep, car riding, etc.? IME, most parents don’t bother to look at real risks like these, because that would require setting limits with kids and they don’t want to do that.

Your response makes me think you ignore those issues based on the fact that you didn’t actually answer the questions and you don’t want to admit how badly you’re failing your kids in THOSE areas. Easier to turn the subject back to those awful parents who allow social media!

Sure, Heather, you’ve caught me now!

Except that I’m the only parent of (11 year old) DD’s friends who won’t let her ride in the front seat. Or give her a phone with unfettered access to YouTube, TikTok, etc. Or who limits sleepovers because she needs her sleep. But sure, you go on with your brilliant assumptions!

You have once again avoided answering the questions.

How often is she riding in a car rather than walking or biking? What time is she waking up in the morning to go to school? What time does she go to sleep at night? What’s her diet like? How much unstructured free time does she have? How often is she going outside?

The restrictions you put on her sound like they’re mostly for show. So other parents can SEE what a good parent you are. But that still has nothing to do with her actual day to day existence.

Lol - guess what? Answering a set of increasingly intrusive questions by some internet rando would be "mostly for show." Hard pass.

I can see that my questions have triggered you. Maybe spend some time thinking deeply about why that is, and less time judging the parenting skills of “internet randos”. Good luck!

So much projection. So.Much.Projection.

I know it must be a good point because you said it twice. I’ll bet you were captain of your high school debate team.

[Anonymous]

DP. To continue:

- No direct messaging on this site where any weirdo can contact you, pretending to be someone they’re not.

- No autoplay videos taking you way, way, way down rabbit holes that you don’t remember how you fell into

- No one we actually know in real life! (At least that we can be sure of).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't. I'm hoping they thank me later. Oldest not yet in high school, though, which is when it may be hard to hold out.

My closest childhood friend works for one of the big Silicon Valley companies. Her kids go to "Forest School" and she tries not to let them see the parents on devices at all. She's seen into the belly of the beast and knows enough to be scared.

I have two in high school in fcps. Neither has it.
They are doing just fine.

That’s cool. So are all the kids I know who do have it. We can share anecdotes all day.

Sure Jan

I know for some strange reason you want to believe all teens are depressed and mentally ill, but they just aren’t. Sorry to…disappoint you?

DP. You think if a kid isn’t showing signs of full blown depression or mental illness that social media isn’t possibly affecting their mental wellbeing?

No, but neither is it accurate to say that ALL or even MOST teens who have social media are negatively affected by it. It simply isn't true. The people asserting that either don't have teens at all, or their teens are not on social media, so they have no idea.

Depends on how you define “negatively affected.”

So your oldest is 8? 10? I know your type.

Why do you assume that? My oldest is 15.

If they don’t have social media, you are not qualified to remark on how it’s affecting their mental health.

Geez, you REALLY love social media for your kids (and likely yourself). I know your type, too.

Yet here you are. So much hand wringing!

Sigh.

If you believe DCUMAD is in any way comparable to the social media defendants being sued by 30 separate States Attorneys General, then you are truly stupid.

Perhaps TikTok has rotted your brain?

DP but please explain the difference. This site is addictive and a waste of time and is generally negative. (For example, if you were discussing this issue with PP would you call her “truly stupid” to her face? I should certainly hope not!)

This form of social media (and it absolutely IS social media) is not inherently better just because it’s the form that YOU’RE addicted to.

DP and I actually largely agree, but I don't think it proves OP wrong.

I hate my DCUM use. And I wound up on this site largely because I stopped or greatly reduced using other forms of social media. Kind of like how if you go to an AA meeting, a LOT of people smoke cigarettes. That doesn't mean cigarettes are *good* for those folks, but they will kill them slightly slower than alcohol would.

I don't want my kid using social media OR DCUM. But there is little risk in my kid developing a DCUM habit right now, whereas Tik Tok is definitely on the table. So I restrict Tik Tok and hope if I can prevent my kid from ever getting addicted to social media, she won't later be addicted to DCUM like I am. It's not hypocrisy, it's learning from your own mistakes and hoping to do better by my kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't. I'm hoping they thank me later. Oldest not yet in high school, though, which is when it may be hard to hold out.

My closest childhood friend works for one of the big Silicon Valley companies. Her kids go to "Forest School" and she tries not to let them see the parents on devices at all. She's seen into the belly of the beast and knows enough to be scared.

I have two in high school in fcps. Neither has it.
They are doing just fine.

That’s cool. So are all the kids I know who do have it. We can share anecdotes all day.

Sure Jan

I know for some strange reason you want to believe all teens are depressed and mentally ill, but they just aren’t. Sorry to…disappoint you?

DP. You think if a kid isn’t showing signs of full blown depression or mental illness that social media isn’t possibly affecting their mental wellbeing?

No, but neither is it accurate to say that ALL or even MOST teens who have social media are negatively affected by it. It simply isn't true. The people asserting that either don't have teens at all, or their teens are not on social media, so they have no idea.

Depends on how you define “negatively affected.”

So your oldest is 8? 10? I know your type.

Why do you assume that? My oldest is 15.

If they don’t have social media, you are not qualified to remark on how it’s affecting their mental health.

Geez, you REALLY love social media for your kids (and likely yourself). I know your type, too.

Yet here you are. So much hand wringing!

Sigh.

If you believe DCUMAD is in any way comparable to the social media defendants being sued by 30 separate States Attorneys General, then you are truly stupid.

Perhaps TikTok has rotted your brain?

DP but please explain the difference. This site is addictive and a waste of time and is generally negative. (For example, if you were discussing this issue with PP would you call her “truly stupid” to her face? I should certainly hope not!)

This form of social media (and it absolutely IS social media) is not inherently better just because it’s the form that YOU’RE addicted to.

OK; I wrote the prior response so I’ll bite:

Sure, you can loosely call DCUMAD “social media” - but the similarities end there.

- algorithm: Jeff’s board does not have one. Moreover, even if he did, Jeff is nothing like the highly-paid, evil-geniuses behind SM such as TikTok, which carefully studies your viewing habits, then purposefully DIRECTS you to new posts/videos to intentionally keep you on the site. No, DCUMAD is completely different: you and you-alone decide where to go on this board.

- tracking: DCUMAD does not do that to you. This site does not even have log-on names for 99% of users

- big data: this site is not connected to it. All other SM is deeply intertwined with big data

- selling your info: this site does not sell your data to 3rd parties. All other SM does.

- content ownership: other SM’s own the content you creat and post over there. You did not know? Yes - it’s right in the terms you agreed to on Insta, FB, etc - but you never bothered to read every word, did you.

There are too many other differences to list.

Super weird and defensive response. While the points you listed are indeed problems with other forms of social media you did not address DCUM in terms of the topic of this thread, namely that it is addictive and is ultimately bad for your mental health.

Maybe it’s just me, but the “recent topics” is what keeps me addicted to this board, and usually entices me to click on posts about topics I would never have searched for on my own.

And you are correct that I didn’t read every word of the user agreements with FB and Instagram… because I don’t have accounts with them. This site is bad enough.

(Finally, I assume you know the site owner personally in real life? Otherwise it is beyond creepy that you seem to be on a first name basis with him…)

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't. I'm hoping they thank me later. Oldest not yet in high school, though, which is when it may be hard to hold out.

My closest childhood friend works for one of the big Silicon Valley companies. Her kids go to "Forest School" and she tries not to let them see the parents on devices at all. She's seen into the belly of the beast and knows enough to be scared.

I have two in high school in fcps. Neither has it.
They are doing just fine.

That’s cool. So are all the kids I know who do have it. We can share anecdotes all day.

Sure Jan

I know for some strange reason you want to believe all teens are depressed and mentally ill, but they just aren’t. Sorry to…disappoint you?

DP. You think if a kid isn’t showing signs of full blown depression or mental illness that social media isn’t possibly affecting their mental wellbeing?

No, but neither is it accurate to say that ALL or even MOST teens who have social media are negatively affected by it. It simply isn't true. The people asserting that either don't have teens at all, or their teens are not on social media, so they have no idea.

Depends on how you define “negatively affected.”

So your oldest is 8? 10? I know your type.

Why do you assume that? My oldest is 15.

If they don’t have social media, you are not qualified to remark on how it’s affecting their mental health.

Geez, you REALLY love social media for your kids (and likely yourself). I know your type, too.

Yet here you are. So much hand wringing!

Sigh.

If you believe DCUMAD is in any way comparable to the social media defendants being sued by 30 separate States Attorneys General, then you are truly stupid.

Perhaps TikTok has rotted your brain?

DP but please explain the difference. This site is addictive and a waste of time and is generally negative. (For example, if you were discussing this issue with PP would you call her “truly stupid” to her face? I should certainly hope not!)

This form of social media (and it absolutely IS social media) is not inherently better just because it’s the form that YOU’RE addicted to.

OK; I wrote the prior response so I’ll bite:

Sure, you can loosely call DCUMAD “social media” - but the similarities end there.

- algorithm: Jeff’s board does not have one. Moreover, even if he did, Jeff is nothing like the highly-paid, evil-geniuses behind SM such as TikTok, which carefully studies your viewing habits, then purposefully DIRECTS you to new posts/videos to intentionally keep you on the site. No, DCUMAD is completely different: you and you-alone decide where to go on this board.

- tracking: DCUMAD does not do that to you. This site does not even have log-on names for 99% of users

- big data: this site is not connected to it. All other SM is deeply intertwined with big data

- selling your info: this site does not sell your data to 3rd parties. All other SM does.

- content ownership: other SM’s own the content you creat and post over there. You did not know? Yes - it’s right in the terms you agreed to on Insta, FB, etc - but you never bothered to read every word, did you.

There are too many other differences to list.

The previous poster asked me to review her post for accuracy so I will provide the following feedback:

- algorithm the closest thing we have to an algorithm is the "Recent Topics" thread which is probably the most primitive algorithm in existence. It simply lists the topics that have most recently been updated. Similarly, the "Hottest Topics" page lists the topics with the most views. But, I would go a step further and point out that troll posts are regularly among the most active threads and I lock or delete them when I find them. A traditional social media platform would encourage and promote such threads because they are guaranteed to generate traffic. I actively shut them down.

- tracking, big data, selling your info. I do very limited tracking as most posters are aware. This is to combat trolls and other malicious users. None of what I do is for financial gain but rather for site integrity purposes. In addition, we use advertising networks that to some extent do more. Advertisers use cookies and other means to track you, they analyze that data in order to make decisions about which, if any, ads to serve, and they may sell the data they gleam. Note, they cannot gather any personally identifying data from this site because we don't collect it. Even if you created an account, the most they could get is your name and email address but I don't even provide them access to that (though they ask a lot).

Content ownership. I haven't really thought about it but I guess, technically, I own the content.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't. I'm hoping they thank me later. Oldest not yet in high school, though, which is when it may be hard to hold out.

My closest childhood friend works for one of the big Silicon Valley companies. Her kids go to "Forest School" and she tries not to let them see the parents on devices at all. She's seen into the belly of the beast and knows enough to be scared.

I have two in high school in fcps. Neither has it.
They are doing just fine.

That’s cool. So are all the kids I know who do have it. We can share anecdotes all day.

Sure Jan

I know for some strange reason you want to believe all teens are depressed and mentally ill, but they just aren’t. Sorry to…disappoint you?

DP. You think if a kid isn’t showing signs of full blown depression or mental illness that social media isn’t possibly affecting their mental wellbeing?

No, but neither is it accurate to say that ALL or even MOST teens who have social media are negatively affected by it. It simply isn't true. The people asserting that either don't have teens at all, or their teens are not on social media, so they have no idea.

Depends on how you define “negatively affected.”

So your oldest is 8? 10? I know your type.

Why do you assume that? My oldest is 15.

If they don’t have social media, you are not qualified to remark on how it’s affecting their mental health.

Geez, you REALLY love social media for your kids (and likely yourself). I know your type, too.

Yet here you are. So much hand wringing!

Sigh.

If you believe DCUMAD is in any way comparable to the social media defendants being sued by 30 separate States Attorneys General, then you are truly stupid.

Perhaps TikTok has rotted your brain?

DP but please explain the difference. This site is addictive and a waste of time and is generally negative. (For example, if you were discussing this issue with PP would you call her “truly stupid” to her face? I should certainly hope not!)

This form of social media (and it absolutely IS social media) is not inherently better just because it’s the form that YOU’RE addicted to.

DP and I actually largely agree, but I don't think it proves OP wrong.

I hate my DCUM use. And I wound up on this site largely because I stopped or greatly reduced using other forms of social media. Kind of like how if you go to an AA meeting, a LOT of people smoke cigarettes. That doesn't mean cigarettes are *good* for those folks, but they will kill them slightly slower than alcohol would.

I don't want my kid using social media OR DCUM. But there is little risk in my kid developing a DCUM habit right now, whereas Tik Tok is definitely on the table. So I restrict Tik Tok and hope if I can prevent my kid from ever getting addicted to social media, she won't later be addicted to DCUM like I am. It's not hypocrisy, it's learning from your own mistakes and hoping to do better by my kids.

In your case it’s not hypocrisy because you are aware of your own shortcomings and trying to use that information to make better decisions for your kids (FTR I agree).

I take issue with social media addicted adults (who deny their own addiction) turning around and criticizing/judging everyone ELSE for THEIR shortcomings.

My pessimistic take is that social media is bad for kids but this is the world the adults have created for them, and trying to keep your kids off it completely is a losing battle. Better to help them learn to use it responsibly.