{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/24/2015 12:56:27 AM
2
When you are an eleven year old kid you to not have the fully developed ability to make responsible life descisions so sure the kid shouldn't have done it but the kid would have done it if Kermit hadn't offered it in the first place
English
-
11 is the age to either be in or about to start secondary school here in the UK. So yes he should have known not to do it. Children know a lot younger than 11 not to trust strangers. Though also the parents shouldn't be letting their child stream at 11 and should have embedded that thought process in his mind that strangers are not to be trusted. I believe the mum knew about it or something? She posted something up? Could be wrong, didn't read much into the story.
-
Which is where the parents come into the picture surely? Genuine question - This ELEVEN year old kid is streaming everything he does online (violating at least two, potentially three Terms of Service in doing so) without any kind of supervision - Where the hell were the parents/supervision? But it's all OK, because these days it seems like childcare = sitting your kid in front of the internet 24 hours a day and then complaining when bad stuff happens to them... Isn't it?
