No ebooks allowed at Upperthorpe swimming pool

[nutty34]

Jesus, how do people feel about the viewing area the swimming pool at Springs leisure center?

 

Personally I'd ban all devices from pools, not for fear of someone taking a picture of my child (had I got one) but because it annoys me when children are getting minimum attention because their parent is too busy updating their status because every one needs to know that they're ''on a bus'' or whatever.

 

That said, I think it is madness someone taking a picture of their children's first lesson etc is forced to delete it for fear of them using it in any other way than a memory.

 

Personally I have no issue with viewing areas, I also have no issue with people living their life via Facebook if they wish to do so.

 

Simply I was offering a reason why these rules exist based on personal experiences.

[Sid Umpley]

Mate you never picked any holes in my scenario, I never said I posted any pictures on my Facebook account !

 

To be honest you refuse to accept any other point of view other than your own, even when a person such as myself who has experienced such an incident offers a genuine reason as to why cameras may be banned.

 

Believe it or not we do not actually live in a perfect world where everyone you meet is genuine!

 

 

here we go again.,

 

so the scenario you suggested (friend of a friend looking at pics) was not actually your facebook but someone elses?

 

i am listening to your viewpoint but so far i see nothing more than the views of someone who has been royally taken in to suspect everyone.

 

 

and your right we dont live in such a perfect world. but we also dont live in one where every adult male is suspect.

 

i think my realistic view on the world is closer to reality than your suspicious one.

 

 

 

a question.

 

your in the park. its a summers day. standing at one end is an old bloke with a tripod and expensive camera. he is there for a long time and takes a lot of photos.

 

whats your first thoughts? theres a paedo? Ban the camera? phone the police? what?

[nutty34]

I think the other thing to remember here is that a few years ago this was not an issue as a photograph would just be a personal memory inside a photo album, whereas today they are plastered all over the Internet on social media sites available to one and all.

 

---------- Post added 20-07-2013 at 22:32 ----------

 

here we go again.,

 

so the scenario you suggested (friend of a friend looking at pics) was not actually your facebook but someone elses?

 

i am listening to your viewpoint but so far i see nothing more than the views of someone who has been royally taken in to suspect everyone.

 

 

and your right we dont live in such a perfect world. but we also dont live in one where every adult male is suspect.

 

i think my realistic view on the world is closer to reality than your suspicious one.

 

 

 

a question.

 

your in the park. its a summers day. standing at one end is an old bloke with a tripod and expensive camera. he is there for a long time and takes a lot of photos.

 

whats your first thoughts? theres a paedo? Ban the camera? phone the police? what?

 

Believe it or not I have no issue with anyone standing in a park with a camera taking pictures. The scenario I painted was a swimming pool. But to back up your theory it suits to change the goalposts.

 

I have had enough of this conversation now. Good night

[Badlittlepup]

the ONLY mention on the net about the incident at the baths was made on this forum

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/archive/index.php/t-626995.html

 

the last post was from a police officer who stated more news would be forthcoming. NONE ever was.

so. it never happened. someone made an unfounded allegation maybe?

if it had actually happened there would surely be more information about it.

 

dont believe the rumours.. most of them are not true.

 

Wrong. His name was Neil Smith and he was convicted as per the below stories from the Yorkshire Post and Daily Mail.

 

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/local-stories/black-tape-moustache-disguise-for-leisure-centre-peeping-tom-1-3030976

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345861/Pervert-Neil-Smith-filmed-women-changing-rooms-blames-viagra-wifes-menopause.html

 

You need to learn how to google properly!

 

So no, not rumours. He was convicted and he had done it before in Doncaster. So there is good reason, particularly when it is known that there is somebody local who makes a habit of exactly this kind of thing. I am reassured by the fact that they are taking steps to prevent this kind of thing.

[the_bloke]

The photo is placed again innocently on Facebook. A friend of a friend sees the photo and alerts the family of the child.

 

Facebook does not work that way. If you post a picture on Facebook to your own set of albums or your wall, you need to modify the security settings of the album or individual picture for it to be available to anyone more than your own friends.

 

Even if it was somehow exposed to either 'friends of friends' or 'everyone' then you either need to have mutual friends with the parents of the child which sounds like a very bad idea indeed, or you would have to be stalked for the parents to spot the photographs on your profile.

 

IT manager?

 

Anyway, to the other posters moaning about the OP reading a book during a swimming lesson - do you seriously stare at your child in deep concentration from behind glass 20 odd feet away, week in week out? In the hope he'll see you and go 'ooh, I'm being watched, I'll swim so much better now'. Rather he was paying attention to the instructor, not me.

 

I used to let my boy get changed in the changing room on his own whilst I waited in the viewing area, made sure he came out okay and was in the care of the teacher, then read a book for 40 minutes with a few glances to make sure nothing was obviously wrong. I'd give him 5 mins after the lesson had ended before I'd check on him in the changing room. He was 7 at the time. Is this sort of behaviour considered heinous by the MumsNet brigade?

 

For the record, he's now 9 and can buy things in shops on his own, use the bus and tram on his own if he needs to, certainly dress himself in a changing room on his own and the only thing preventing him from taking himself to school is a school rule, not his lack of ability. This isn't irresponsible parenting, this is teaching my child how to do things in life with confidence and maturity so he doesn't terrify himself at 15 when faced with using a bus or buying milk.

[Badlittlepup]

 

dont believe the rumours.. most of them are not true.

 

And don't be patronising, it only makes you look silly when you're proved wrong.

[Sid Umpley]

what if the park has a pool (as my local one in Rivelin does)?

 

 

why run? this is getting fun? trying to work out if your for real or not. so far you have given no facts, only a few short stories that infer people with cameras are not trustworthy.

[nutty34]

Facebook does not work that way. If you post a picture on Facebook to your own set of albums or your wall, you need to modify the security settings of the album or individual picture for it to be available to anyone more than your own friends.

 

Even if it was somehow exposed to either 'friends of friends' or 'everyone' then you either need to have mutual friends with the parents of the child which sounds like a very bad idea indeed, or you would have to be stalked for the parents to spot the photographs on your profile.

 

IT manager?

 

Anyway, to the other posters moaning about the OP reading a book during a swimming lesson - do you seriously stare at your child in deep concentration from behind glass 20 odd feet away, week in week out? In the hope he'll see you and go 'ooh, I'm being watched, I'll swim so much better now'. Rather he was paying attention to the instructor, not me.

 

I used to let my boy get changed in the changing room on his own whilst I waited in the viewing area, made sure he came out okay and was in the care of the teacher, then read a book for 40 minutes with a few glances to make sure nothing was obviously wrong. I'd give him 5 mins after the lesson had ended before I'd check on him in the changing room. He was 7 at the time. Is this sort of behaviour considered heinous by the MumsNet brigade?

 

For the record, he's now 9 and can buy things in shops on his own, use the bus and tram on his own if he needs to, certainly dress himself in a changing room on his own and the only thing preventing him from taking himself to school is a school rule, not his lack of ability. This isn't irresponsible parenting, this is teaching my child how to do things in life with confidence and maturity so he doesn't terrify himself at 15 when faced with using a bus or buying milk.

 

Again ... Missing the point. Just because you and I have Facebook security set up correctly it does not mean everyone does.

 

I would wager that most of the users on here have an open Facebook profile, though clearly I can not prove or disprove this.

 

I will say this one last time. I am aware of a very similar incident to the scenario I painted earlier ... Not with my FB profile I hasten to add for clarity.

 

---------- Post added 20-07-2013 at 22:42 ----------

 

what if the park has a pool (as my local one in Rivelin does)?

 

 

why run? this is getting fun? trying to work out if your for real or not. so far you have given no facts, only a few short stories that infer people with cameras are not trustworthy.

 

You see now this is where we differ as people, I am fully aware of what is or may be going on around me, whilst you think it to by fun ?

 

---------- Post added 20-07-2013 at 22:43 ----------

 

Personally I do not find things such as this funny:

 

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/local-stories/black-tape-moustache-disguise-for-leisure-centre-peeping-tom-1-3030976

 

What more proof do you need ?

[Lpsmum]

Facebook does not work that way. If you post a picture on Facebook to your own set of albums or your wall, you need to modify the security settings of the album or individual picture for it to be available to anyone more than your own friends.

 

Even if it was somehow exposed to either 'friends of friends' or 'everyone' then you either need to have mutual friends with the parents of the child which sounds like a very bad idea indeed, or you would have to be stalked for the parents to spot the photographs on your profile.

 

IT Manager?

 

Read it again. He's talking about someone else posting a fb photo. He has no control over anyone else's settings

[the_bloke]

Wrong. His name was Neil Smith and he was convicted as per the below stories from the Yorkshire Post and Daily Mail.

 

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/local-stories/black-tape-moustache-disguise-for-leisure-centre-peeping-tom-1-3030976

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345861/Pervert-Neil-Smith-filmed-women-changing-rooms-blames-viagra-wifes-menopause.html

 

You need to learn how to google properly!

 

So no, not rumours. He was convicted and he had done it before in Doncaster. So there is good reason, particularly when it is known that there is somebody local who makes a habit of exactly this kind of thing. I am reassured by the fact that they are taking steps to prevent this kind of thing.

 

That guy was convicted as he was using a hidden camera on a stick to film women and children getting changed in the changing room.

 

The OP was told they couldn't use a device that may or may not have a camera in the public viewing gallery, not the changing room.

 

Does this mean that the swimming pool suspects that everyone in the viewing area is a potential pedophile? I don't know about you, but that makes me feel pretty angry, and I imagine that is how the OP felt as well. Being marked as a pervert far outweighs the loss of reading a book for 40 minutes.

 

Whats going to happen in 5 years time when Google Glass becomes more popular?

 

'Sorry, you have to take your glasses off in the viewing area'

'But I need them to see my child in the pool'

'Sorry, that is the rule'

'Fine, might as well sit outside in the car then..'

 

---------- Post added 20-07-2013 at 22:53 ----------

 

Again ... Missing the point. Just because you and I have Facebook security set up correctly it does not mean everyone does

 

I'm sorry, but I hate your line of thought. The stifling of personal freedoms to cater for other people's stupidity. I can't use a camera in place X because a more stupid person might post a picture to 'popular website of choice' that might get seen by someone else yet as far as we know it has never happened. But it might.