Gee, I don't know, I'd think it means short sighted or narrow minded, even ill informed.....what do you think it means?
Gee, I don't know, I'd think it means short sighted or narrow minded, even ill informed.....what do you think it means?
Let's make this simple...dad, if you check the phone records and find that your daughter is texting during school hours, either get rid of her texting abilities or take away her cell phone. Easy enough?
ray wrote:
Let's make this simple...dad, if you check the phone records and find that your daughter is texting during school hours, either get rid of her texting abilities or take away her cell phone. Easy enough?
+1
ray wrote:
So I would say that both of you are actually students who also seem to have the disease of 'entitlement". There are not many schools in america today that allow cell phone use during school hours. So explain how you can send over 4,000 texts in a month while also likely IMing, facebooking, talking on your cell, talking face to face, etc unless a good portion of that is done at school? That's my point but if you think that makes me a troll that is your right. Talk about smallminded......
I don't about other places, but my high school allowed cell phones as long as they were not used in class. Occasionally, a teacher would spot someone texting in class and confiscate the phone for the remainder of the class period or even the entire day, depending on the student's previous offenses. As I stated in my previous post, there is good reason for parents to buy their children phones with or without texting. I knew students at my high school whose parents took things too far and sometimes called them during lunch to check that they were still at school. Having a cell phone in high school facilitates both socialization and parental "harassment," as an HSer would say. Another issue here is that parental disapproval can make a child want to do something more. It would work better to have a discussion on appropriate/inappropriate cell use, and only take the phone away if grades start to suffer as a result of its use. In the OP's case, his daughter probably only sent about half of those 4000 text messages, because messages received are counted as well. Realistically, she was probably sending an average of between 60 and 70 texts a day. That's a lot more than I send, but it doesn't seem unreasonable.
trollism wrote:
I would say that you're not a student and you have the disease of 'being a self-righteous bell-end'.
Do we know if her grades are suffering because of it? No.
It's already been explained how 4000 messages (sent or received) can be reached without it actually being that huge a deal. So we don't know whether a 'good portion' is being done at school.
(Damn it, one childish insult, but you remind me a lot of Flagpole so in my mind it was warrented.)
Geez brother. I actually CAN imagine too how 4,000 texts can be reached in a month by a kid, so you and I agree here. If you read my posts (the serious ones) you can't really say I'm childish...not if your honest with yourself.
ray wrote:
Gee, I don't know, I'd think it means short sighted or narrow minded, even ill informed.....what do you think it means?
Well, looks like you do know what the word means, but not how to use it properly.
You:
- Making broad generalizations ("Anybody sending more than 2-3 texts a day does not really have a life")
- Assuming nefarious behavior for no valid reason ("If a kid is sending that many text messages a day I can assure you that they are breaking rules and ignoring responsibilities.")
- Generally acting like the text police (see above)
Others:
- Choosing not to jump to conclusions ("Please explain to me how spending an hour a day communicating with one's friends necessarily means that one is breaking rules or ignoring responsibilities.")
- Advocating that people be allowed to make their own decisions for themselves, especially when no harm has been demonstrated ("So if your daughter is doing fine in school and generally happy, then there is no problem..Live and let live people.")
The opinions you've expressed are knee-jerk "those kids today must be doing something wrong" opinions. For some reason you have a bias against teenagers, cell phones, or text messages. You are the small-minded one.
Live and let live is never a small-minded sentiment.
ray, this is you: http://www.theonion.com/content/news/area_teen_up_to_something
Monica wrote:
[quote]rayL wrote:
You must be a troll because your reply is ridiculous.....
There are a few too many worker bees on this thread that think anything other than doing chores 24 hours a day is sinful - these are the people who are scared of these devil cell phones, and teenagers, and girls, and people that have fun, and anything other than their little well defined, overcontrolled world. In most cases these people are so uncertain of their moral fortitude that they try to control others, so as to avoid temptation. In other cases, they have such existential angst at their own purposelessness that they overcompensate by eschewing all fun or relaxation. Either way it is small minded. Live and let live people.
Sounds pretty ill informed or narrow minded to me....
Again, I have nothing against text messaging. There is a time and a place for it. 4,000 a month by a student warrants taking a look at when they are sent. If that is unreasonable I apologize. Troll-like behavior?
[/quote]
Sounds pretty ill informed or narrow minded to me....
Again, I have nothing against text messaging. There is a time and a place for it. 4,000 a month by a student warrants taking a look at when they are sent. If that is unreasonable I apologize. Troll-like behavior?[/quote]
Dude, for most of the real world and especially anyone under the age of 35, sending a text message is the same as speaking. It costs nothing and takes next to no time. It's true, there is a time and a place for speaking and listening: almost everywhere and almost all the time. Perhaps not during a funeral or something or during an exam, but apart from that it is pretty fine.
Would you limit the amount of words his daugher could say a day? (Maybe you'll say if she says more than 4,000 words a month she must be breaking rules? Maybe you'll say she doesn't need to say more than 4,000 words. Maybe you'll come out with some other new crazy argument.)
She's a good girl, gets her homework done, causes no trouble, texts her friends and speaks. Let's not curtail these last two.
Flagpole wrote:
Geez brother. I actually CAN imagine too how 4,000 texts can be reached in a month by a kid, so you and I agree here. If you read my posts (the serious ones) you can't really say I'm childish...not if your honest with yourself.
Nah, I didn't say you were childish. I said that I was childish for using the insult.
I jumped to the (wrong) conclusion that your opinion would be somewhere along the lines of what 'ray' wrote. I remembered you had a post in the thread but couldn't recall what it actually said. I apologise.
I would smash the phone right in front of her and tell her to go buy her own. Guarantee to work.
some coked up brit wrote:
Sounds pretty ill informed or narrow minded to me....
Again, I have nothing against text messaging. There is a time and a place for it. 4,000 a month by a student warrants taking a look at when they are sent. If that is unreasonable I apologize. Troll-like behavior?[/quote]
Dude, for most of the real world and especially anyone under the age of 35, sending a text message is the same as speaking. It costs nothing and takes next to no time. It's true, there is a time and a place for speaking and listening: almost everywhere and almost all the time. Perhaps not during a funeral or something or during an exam, but apart from that it is pretty fine.
Would you limit the amount of words his daugher could say a day? (Maybe you'll say if she says more than 4,000 words a month she must be breaking rules? Maybe you'll say she doesn't need to say more than 4,000 words. Maybe you'll come out with some other new crazy argument.)
She's a good girl, gets her homework done, causes no trouble, texts her friends and speaks. Let's not curtail these last two.[/quote]
You should probably do another line....
I am 24 and I think I've sent less than 50 texts my whole life. And I have unlimited texts.
trollism wrote:
Nah, I didn't say you were childish. I said that I was childish for using the insult.
I apologise.
Very big of you brother. I accept.
Flagpole wrote:
trollism wrote:Nah, I didn't say you were childish. I said that I was childish for using the insult.
I apologise.
Very big of you brother. I accept.
Flagpole is really hulk hogan????
The Bare Facts wrote:
She's 14 and just got a phone for the first time in April (we wouldn't let her get one until she finished 9th grade,
What's her number? I'll have a talk with her.
It's not a big deal. I've sent over 100 in a single day, and I'm a guy. I could easily hit a few thousand including AIM messages, etc., which all count as texts. All it means is that she has texting conversations with good friends.
Look at the sample text and do the math. The child looks to be typing about 150 words/day. I have more than that censored daily by Letsrun mods for content disparaging of Christian fundamentalists. [Note: copy and paste this post to a Word document immediately if you enjoyed it and want to read it again later.]
Flagpole wrote:
...not if your honest with yourself.
"you're"
Please fall on your sword; please die.
it is not a problem if the messages were sent to you.
Otherwise, it might be. Does she send to guys?
Grounding and some hard work (manual labor) for a month or so is an option.