"Reef Safe" Vendors

U

User1

Guest
View Badges
I guess the OP has never taken their children to Disneyland, or Disneyworld, or anywhere with a lot of anonymous people.

Evil people will do evil things regardless of the measures you propose.

Onus is on parents to do what they are supposed to, parent. Just like our elected officials are supposed to do what they got voted into office for. And that is to govern. Sometimes I wish the industrial revolution never happened. This world is going into the pooper.
 

helen ann

7500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
7,745
Reaction score
14,221
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
WOW I just seen this and started reading then had to stop. I have attended a couple of frag shows and they are packed!
Kids are curious and easily distracted and so are we, then add trying to squeeze and jockey to get a glimpse at the corals.
Then their is the raffles with everyone bunched up and pushing the stage or moving with the crowd from one table to the next draw. Total bedlam and madness, this is not a family friendly environment BUT SHOULD BE!
Venues should first hold them in larger halls, A kids area should also have Paid professionals to watch all the kids, all of my daughters (3) took child care classes in school and worked in the latchkey programs and became certified for just such events.

Now CORAL VENDORS are NOT SAFE havens because they volunteered, a registered offender is one that got caught! :mad:
and found guilty I might add.
Thank you, will look into the ‘latchkey’ program!!!
 

helen ann

7500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
7,745
Reaction score
14,221
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I guess the OP has never taken their children to Disneyland, or Disneyworld, or anywhere with a lot of anonymous people.

Evil people will do evil things regardless of the measures you propose.

Onus is on parents to do what they are supposed to, parent. Just like our elected officials are supposed to do what they got voted into office for. And that is to govern. Sometimes I wish the industrial revolution never happened. This world is going into the pooper.

Yes, I have taken him to Disney and other attractions. I am well aware that I could pass several people a day who are on the registry. I can’t let him walk around in constant fear that something could happen but I can try and give him the tools to keep himself safe and these are just additional tools as I see it.
 
U

User1

Guest
View Badges
Yes, I have taken him to Disney and other attractions. I am well aware that I could pass several people a day who are on the registry. I can’t let him walk around in constant fear that something could happen but I can try and give him the tools to keep himself safe and these are just additional tools as I see it.

Then please explain to me how a convention is any different?
 

bluprntguy

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
877
Reaction score
1,315
Location
San Francisco
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
You have repeatedly mentioned banning people from things. I just want to be sure you realize that the proposed plan wouldn't ban anyone from the events.

We're talking about having marked safe zones where children can go and armbands.

Sorry, but I think this is a completely inaccurate representation of the initial post. The original suggestion was to allow all the "vendors" that meet the OP's personal standards of not being a threat to children to have a "reef safe" sticker, thereby brandishing everyone that doesn't have a sticker as being unsafe. It's nothing short of the scarlet letter in reverse. Your refusal to see how troubling that is doesn't mean that it's not troubling to everyone that recognizes the problem.
 

helen ann

7500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
7,745
Reaction score
14,221
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Sorry, but I think this is a completely inaccurate representation of the initial post. The original suggestion was to allow all the "vendors" that meet the OP's personal standards of not being a threat to children to have a "reef safe" sticker, thereby brandishing everyone that doesn't have a sticker as being unsafe. It's nothing short of the scarlet letter in reverse. Your refusal to see how troubling that is doesn't mean that it's not troubling to everyone that recognizes the problem.
The OP was not intended to come across as a ‘be all’ solution, like I have said it was to have the discussion and get ideas. I am not a PR person and it could have been worded better but nothing I can do about that now. I just thought it was a discussion worth having it wasn’t to upset anyone, ban or exclude anyone from attending a show.
 

Daniel@R2R

Living the Reef Life
View Badges
Joined
Nov 18, 2012
Messages
37,364
Reaction score
63,255
Location
Fontana, California
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Sorry, but I think this is a completely inaccurate representation of the initial post. The original suggestion was to allow all the "vendors" that meet the OP's personal standards of not being a threat to children to have a "reef safe" sticker, thereby brandishing everyone that doesn't have a sticker as being unsafe. It's nothing short of the scarlet letter in reverse. Your refusal to see how troubling that is doesn't mean that it's not troubling to everyone that recognizes the problem.
The proposal was that any vendors who wanted to volunteer to be screened could be. Now, if there's a better idea for how safe zones could be established, then let's discuss that. However, I think it's a misrepresentation to say that it was left to the OP's "personal standards." It seemed to me from the original post that the idea was that there will be a process in place for screening (which, if this is handled as it usually is with volunteers in kids areas at non-profits, means objective standards including a background check). I also don't think the idea was to brandish anyone as anything for not having a sticker. However, I do understand the concern for vendors who might not go through that process for whatever reason. Perhaps there's a better idea that can be suggested. That's part of the reason for this dialogue.

The post you quoted above was in response to someone who had seemed to imply that the OP wanted people banned from the event. That has never been suggested by the OP (or anyone in this discussion that I've seen). My point was simply that we're talking about establishing kid safe areas where a lost child can go and wristbands for identification. That is the proposal in question.
 

KLaRue

Community Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
93
Reaction score
323
Location
Plano
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I just re-read the original post. The referenced idea of signage for “reef safe” seems to me to be copying of the concept of a “safe haven” signage I see at fire stations, police stations, etc to let kids know this is a place you can safely go when you need help. Given that, it is not a reflection of a vendor saying “everyone working here has been vetted for not being a child predator.”
And if I’m wrong, well, maybe that should be the intent of earning the signage. ‍
 
U

User1

Guest
View Badges
It’s not.

Then I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish. The onus is on the parent then if this is a venue they want to visit. My main concern here is with a label and the ramifications. Intentional or not there is always a cause and an effect. More importantly is this a venue that this makes sense.
 

jayala12

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 13, 2017
Messages
694
Reaction score
1,212
Location
Corpus Christi Texas
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
This discussion has morphed from the op for the better. But there is some people that just don’t seem to get that. They keep beating a dead horse :rolleyes:
 

helen ann

7500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
7,745
Reaction score
14,221
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Then I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish. The onus is on the parent then if this is a venue they want to visit. My main concern here is with a label and the ramifications. Intentional or not there is always a cause and an effect. More importantly is this a venue that this makes sense.
I just wanted to try and make it safer. Clearly my plan doesn’t do that nor is it wanted. Not really much else for me say.

Happy Reefing!
 

TheHarold

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
5,143
Reaction score
8,752
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
You have repeatedly mentioned banning people from things. I just want to be sure you realize that the proposed plan wouldn't ban anyone from the events.

We're talking about having marked safe zones where children can go and armbands.

But don’t be concrete. Saying “everyone gets a safe zone sticker except the one with a record” is the equivalent of bannig someone.

If the “safe zone” is unrelated to the vendors, perfect. Have a booth in the center with some tall flags or something.
 
U

User1

Guest
View Badges
I just wanted to try and make it safer. Clearly my plan doesn’t do that nor is it wanted. Not really much else for me say.

Happy Reefing!

Happy reefing as well.

I'm a parent of 3 although sounds like mine are older than yours. 2 in college and one out. Two boys and a daughter. I believe I understand the intent but view the world a bit differently. And to put it into a bit of perspective my youngest, also my daughter, actually got lost when she was young in Disneyland. Talking about freaking out, warp factor 10 so bad that Disneyland security had to restrain me from trying to close the park (true story). In the end my daughter walked her happy little rear crying to the fire station near the entrance and explained to the staff she was lost. They cooked her up breakfast while tracking us down. Go figure.

If I sounded like I came in hot please accept my apologies. Not my intent. I wish the world was different but it isn't. I don't think it is getting any better. If you couldn't tell I'm more into the parenting, parents, family, and dynamics first then look at the rest. Probably a topic I should have stayed out of.

Wish you the best and a grand weekend.
 

Daniel@R2R

Living the Reef Life
View Badges
Joined
Nov 18, 2012
Messages
37,364
Reaction score
63,255
Location
Fontana, California
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
But don’t be concrete. Saying “everyone gets a safe zone sticker except the one with a record” is the equivalent of banking someone.
But per the OP everyone DOESN'T get a safe zone sticker except someone with a record....only those who volunteer to be screened to be in safe zones. For example, at our church, only those who volunteer and get cleared via background check and screening are allowed to work in the kids area. That doesn't mean other members of the church are bad people or aren't safe. It simply means that we have screened those working in the kids area. They volunteered to be screened, and that's the same process proposed in the OP (at least that's what I'm reading there).
 

helen ann

7500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
7,745
Reaction score
14,221
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
But don’t be concrete. Saying “everyone gets a safe zone sticker except the one with a record” is the equivalent of bannig someone.

If the “safe zone” is unrelated to the vendors, perfect. Have a booth in the center with some tall flags or something.
So, if we eliminate the individual vendor sticker part will that help?

That wasn’t a part of the original plan but some vendors wanted that is why it was added.
 

Bleigh

The best bad influence
View Badges
Joined
Jan 15, 2019
Messages
9,074
Reaction score
22,373
Location
Charlotte, NC
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Sorry, but I think this is a completely inaccurate representation of the initial post. The original suggestion was to allow all the "vendors" that meet the OP's personal standards of not being a threat to children to have a "reef safe" sticker, thereby brandishing everyone that doesn't have a sticker as being unsafe. It's nothing short of the scarlet letter in reverse. Your refusal to see how troubling that is doesn't mean that it's not troubling to everyone that recognizes the problem.

I think a bigger issue with that is that it gives a false sense of security. Just because someone hasn't been caught doing something, doesn't mean they can't still be dangerous.
 

helen ann

7500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
7,745
Reaction score
14,221
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
But per the OP everyone DOESN'T get a safe zone sticker except someone with a record....only those who volunteer to be screened to be in safe zones. For example, at our church, only those who volunteer and get cleared via background check and screening are allowed to work in the kids area. That doesn't mean other members of the church are bad people or aren't safe. It simply means that we have screened those working in the kids area. They volunteered to be screened, and that's the same process proposed in the OP (at least that's what I'm reading there).

Yes, screening is for only those that volunteer.
 

Quietman

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
3,245
Reaction score
10,847
Location
Indiana - born and bred
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Curious....are conferences like MACNA considered public or private events? I would think what can be done would depend on that. Private events typically have more leeway on setting rules and policies without incurring excessive legal preparation or actions.
 

bluprntguy

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
877
Reaction score
1,315
Location
San Francisco
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The proposal was that any vendors who wanted to volunteer to be screened could be. Now, if there's a better idea for how safe zones could be established, then let's discuss that. However, I think it's a misrepresentation to say that it was left to the OP's "personal standards." It seemed to me from the original post that the idea was that there will be a process in place for screening (which, if this is handled as it usually is with volunteers in kids areas at non-profits, means objective standards including a background check). I also don't think the idea was to brandish anyone as anything for not having a sticker. However, I do understand the concern for vendors who might not go through that process for whatever reason. Perhaps there's a better idea that can be suggested. That's part of the reason for this dialogue.

The post you quoted above was in response to someone who had seemed to imply that the OP wanted people banned from the event. That has never been suggested by the OP (or anyone in this discussion that I've seen). My point was simply that we're talking about establishing kid safe areas where a lost child can go and wristbands for identification. That is the proposal in question.

It absolutely was intended to be left to her personal standards. She said in her post that "We will check vendors who volunteer their booth to be a "reef safe" place". She gets to make the decisions and apply her own personal morals.

The original proposal goes well beyond creating independent safe zones at the event. The intent was to get vendors to be screened and deemed "safe" so that it was clear what vendors were "unsafe" so they could be avoided and boycotted. I don't understand how you can possibly read the initial post and not get that unless you just are selectively ignoring the things that were ACTUALLY WRITTEN!

If you want to have a post about ways to protect children at coral swaps, you might want to start a different thread. This one begins with a pretty offensive attempt to penalize anyone that doesn't meet the OP's personal moral standards and goes downhill from there. IMO, the initial post doesn't meet the R2R standards that you posted halfway through the thread and it should have been deleted immediately.
 
Back
Top