Let me refresh my drink then, ma'am. Sounds like this could be an interesting post.

Because toddlers can't type and mummies have old arguments.

We all agree there's an age that is "too young". For example: There will never be a five year old moderator.

We all agree there's an age that just "doesn't matter". For example: Nobody will tell a 35 year old they know too much.

Arguments like this are just bickering over details and exceptional people.

Age is often the defining trait of maturity. Being able to handle horrible things without significant emotional problems is a hallmark of an adult. This is why there are no ten year old kids in the military.

But not the people who matter, because you were given Moderator status. This entire post is arguing against a group of people that has no influence or power.

You are getting upset because immature idiots who have no decision-making authority at all are questioning you. Think about that for a moment. When my daughter tells me I'm dumb I don't run outside and start telling everyone she's wrong. I know she is wrong and it doesn't bother me at all.

Educating the young on basic science and social skills is vastly different than giving a medical doctor a three day demonstration of a new way to suture ventricles.

At 10-16 you are learning fundamental skills about yourself and the way the world works. You are a completely different person year to year: Different values, different ways of thinking, everything. Puberty alone will annihilate your sense of "self" harder than a drunk driver hitting a bridge pylon.

But at 27-28? No change. Maybe make a little more income, maybe decide to pick up golfing. Fundamentally your attitude and who are you doesn't change much. You're settled. Stable.

Because the 16 year old has four more years of practice in study habits, successful behaviors and social dynamics. They may not be a complete "person" yet, but they are much farther up that particular mountain climb.

Adults also make time to be youth coaches, education tutors, social workers, counseling aids...

We also have hobbies and interests when our responsibilities are taken care of. Some of those hobbies include designing the game you are posting about. As you get older you learn to handle providing for yourself and others; with mastery of these things comes free time (usually).

No-one is arguing about right and wrong. The problem is: Can a 12 year old handle dozens of people constantly belittling them, tearing them down, questioning every decision and attempting public humiliation every single day?

Very few young kids can handle this. The majority lose their minds over a single bad review of their forum post.

It seems harsh, but by denying the average 12 year old the "Moderator" status we're probably saving them a whole lot of scars caused by truly vicious emotional hyenas. But all the 12 year old sees is the denial, not the concern behind it.

...and in the process most Moderators will be viciously cussed out, made fun of, have to defend themselves against allegations, make unpopular decisions and defend their own judgments. Against ten year olds.

Take a moment to picture a small child screaming at a police officer. Now imagine my face when I see a Mod taking that sort of abuse.

You are the exception, Kira. Your argument is stating "Because I am like this, all children are". That isn't true. Most children are immature, weaseling little candy chiselers.

Agent is another exceptional person. The server as a whole sees several hundred kids come through every day. You two are the literal "One in a thousand" cases. You're pleading the exceptional against the ordinary.

The mean age of a staff member is nearer to 16. A single ten year old-- no matter how amazing-- doesn't throw the entire balance in favor of people barely out of baby teeth.

I'm not entirely sure on "perfectly mentally and physically capable", but that is a different topic entirely.

No. Age is just the easiest benchmark for when someone will be physically capable of handling themselves. Countries disagree on this arbitrary qualification all the time: In America you cannot drink until you're 21. United Kingdom? 16 with an adult, 18 without.

Yes, it does. If your argument is age does not matter then why aren't we hiring 2 year old Moderators? How about 3? 4?

A five year old Mod sounds silly, right? Even if they were an exceptionally well-spoken five year old you know for a fact they couldn't handle the volume of hatred tossed in their direction.

The way you feel about a 5 year old Mod is the same way we feel about a 10 year old. The fact this server has any 10-12 year old Moderators is pretty impressive, but the argument cannot be made that all 12 year olds are operating on the same level, ma'am.

I'm free to continue this discussion via this forum or PM, Kira. But I'm going to keep pointing out:

1. You and Agent are the extremely rare exceptions.
2. People with actual authority (server owners) will disregard age and promote worthy candidates.
3. Letting those without power upset you is harming your argument about maturity.
4. Age is an extremely reliable benchmark, with very few (but remarkable) exceptions.

 

I'm just going to put, holy f***ing s***, that was well written lmfao.
Personally, I feel like, ever the exceptional cases can be prone these upsets and going back into the generic profile of a younger kid.

Tolerance is something that has to be taken into effect. Some people have little, some have a lot.
I would prefer a higher aged moderator team because some younger people can't take any criticism at times. Although some older people can't as well. You also have people who lie to themselves, people who try to bully people and assert their power. Etc. That will be in everyone, but I find it more prominent in younger people.
Young or old, there will always be mods that are bias, corrupt, sticklers, lax, or just have meter long sticks up their asses.