Note: I initially posted this in the Discussions, but felt that I didn't do a good enough job so I copied it here and worked on it more. Additionally, I think this would work better as a blog, not only because this is an opinion, but because mainstream site users can discover it and give their two cents.
Also note that this is more of an improved version, with minor differences.
I also want to apologize in advance for the giant post.
Seeing as I accidentally derailed a thread about the site needing more staff, I have decided to move the conversation of rather or not the internet is appropriate for children here. Here I'm going to elaborate more.
I want to say before I begin that I'm not trying to sound insulting or anything, and I'm VERY sorry to everyone if I do.
Even though still technically a child, I feel that sixteen-year-olds are old enough to use the internet, with minimal to no supervision (depending on the user, of course).
I know this is a controversial opinion, but I don't think children should be allowed on the internet at all. If a child "has" to be on the internet, they should have adult supervision. I am personally grateful that there exists software that blocks harmful and inappropriate content. I am also grateful for child-friendly websites that only host wholesome content the whole family can enjoy. Without supervision, children most likely will stumble upon something inappropriate, and potentially harmful. And if not by accident, they might look something up that isn't appropriate on purpose.
Having children on the internet also causes severe limitations. If websites didn't have to pander to parental groups, the internet would be more of an open field. Unfortunately, there are people who think the internet (as well as video games and television) is a babysitter, and because of this most websites have to grovel to make sure that their content stays appropriate, even at the risk of limiting information and content. It's a huge inconvenience if you're trying to watch something on YouTube, but aren't able to because you need to confirm your age.
While the internet can be used as an educational tool, children are more likely to use it for, shall I say, less intelligent reasons. Left to their own devices, they are more likely to watch YouTube videos that are mind numbingly dumb, or set a bad example, rather than something educational or beneficial in some way.
Unfortunately, today's youth seems to be less focused and, no offense, less intelligent since the internet has become commonplace, which is sort of ironic because now an information super tool is in almost every home, sadly being wasted. Like I said, parents should use it as a tool by printing out things and finding videos that can be educational to their children. I do want to note that educational and family friendly content CAN co-exist with adult stuff, so long as they aren't too close together, and out of the children's metaphorical reach.
Anyone remember Elsagate? If you don't, then tl;dr: a few years back there were some creepy people making horrifying and perverted videos that lured unsuspecting children in by using copyrighted characters like Elsa (hence the name), Peppa Pig, Spider Man, and etc. Parents should look into things before letting their children carelessly immerse themselves in it.
Perverts even use YouTube as a way to lure children. Recently MamaMax (one of the few YouTubers I don't think is a waste of time) did a video about pedos looking for kids on YT. Any site that hosts a wide variety of things is certainly unsafe for children, and I think this proves it.
There is literally no reason why a child needs access to a social networking site. There are a lot of bad people (kidnappers, pedophiles) who use these things specifically to target children. What is a child doing that is so exciting that they need to announce it to the world? And who do they need to get in touch with? I know people with family members scattered all over the world use social media to keep in touch, but there is no reason the parents alone shouldn't have an account for just that reason.
Twitter has recently gone under fire for allowing underaged girls to post what is essentially softcore pornographic photos of themselves. We are living in a time where children think acting like perverts makes them sound like adults (in reality, it has the opposite effect). Children may think that posting lewd photos of themselves is a good way to get attention, or make them seem "grown up" only for it to inadvertently ruin their lives. Fortunately, in a lot of places, it is actually illegal for children post such photos of themselves, as it is, by technicality, spreading cp. It doesn't help that there are almost certainly underaged e-thots on Instagram, collecting money from pedophiles and unsuspecting lesser-yet-still-perverted people.
Children try to be "cool" by following trends. In the past we have seen different kinds of "challenges" (the ginger challenge, the fire challenge, the Momo challenge) which have become popular among kids who have ended up disfiguring themselves horribly, and/or killing themselves as a result. Children are impressionable, and if they see their favorite YouTube "star" do something, they will almost certainly imitate.
I had mentioned the Momo challenge in the above paragraph, which brings me to my next part of the subject. Children can be easily tricked or threatened into doing bad things, be it something like posting lewd photos of themselves or handing out personal information.
Cyber bullying is a huge problem that may unsolvable due to the different degrees of it. Children are more susceptible to cyber bullying than adults, because they don't have enough experience or knowledge to deal with it. They may be afraid to tell an adult about it, or any other kind of harassment they may receive. I don't think I even have to elaborate on this.
As for children being administrators for this site (which started this conversation), I think it is a bad idea for many reasons. The admins get abuse hurled at them on a regular basis, which no child should have to go through. Additionally, children are more likely to act up and issue an unfair ban to someone simply because they do not like them. They could also cause drama with the other staff members, bring in cross-wiki drama, and use their status to keep theirs, or their friends', bad Creepypastas on the site.
If I recall Furbearingbrick was only sixteen years old when she was an admin, and she was one of the bests. Realistically, though, it would be impossible to find a teenage administrator as good as she was. Especially because this fandom has turned toxic, and almost every younger user seems to step out of line one time too many.
Honestly, I'm of the opinion that children shouldn't even be on a horror website, especially one with NSFW content. Project Gutenberg is a good source for classic novels, and hosts horror and sometimes NSFW content, but you only find those if you look for them. In my opinion, it's one site that needs minimal supervision.
I hope if anyone responds, we can have a civilized conversation about this. I want to apologize again if I said anything offensive. I also hope that I'm not breaking any rules by posting this as a blog, since it is already a Discussion post.