Re: surfing uncesored

Dale R. Reed (dale-reed@postoffice.worldnet.att.net)
Mon, 10 Mar 1997 08:04:21 -0800

Wayne Radinsky wrote:
<snip>
> Most of them get
> bored with bad words after they find out that they don't get the
> same shock value from the words when they get overused.

exactly

<snip>

> Besides that, WHAT does this have to do with SVS??? Sudbury
> Valley School has to comply with the law of the land. It may not
> be against the school's philosophy to censor, but the law says,
> for example, that people under 18 shouldn't see pornography, (this
> can vary from place to place), so an SVS-school will comply with
> that. So in my opinion this issue doesn't have anything to do with
> SVS.

If this is so why did not someone from SVS immediately reply to my
posting that they must observe the laws of Massachusetts which say...
and the method by which they are doing this is... why did not a SVS
model school in California come back immediately and say we must observe
the laws of California, we discuss those laws in the school meeting and
then decide how to obey them while maximizing the freedoms of the
students?

It seemed to me this was a interesting test case for determining how the
decisions are made in democratic schools. So far I have learned a lot
from the discussions but as you imply there maybe more to learn.

I will tell you one thing. The homeschoolers can surf anywhere they
want to unless their parents have installed some filters. I am always
comparing the SVS model against the homeschooling/unschooling
model(where there are no compromises with a school of staff and
students) and trying to determine where the students have the most
freedoms and responsibilities. They both operate under the same state
laws. Dale