Sparklebox Update

[GrumbleDook]

From EMBC

The keeper of the Sparklebox site who is still subject to a Sexual Offences Prevention Order for 15 years has been found to also be the keeper of a site called www.lettersandsounds.com which looks like a link to Sparklebox. Based on our current practice of blocking child access to Sparklebox the block has been extended to this new site in line with colleagues in the other RBCs.

If I get more information I will pass it on.

[bossman]

Cheers Tony already done here ;D

[glennda]

Yeah blocked here by WSGFL under the global blocked category.

[FN-GM]

Also sparklebox2.co.uk is another site.

[LisaW]

Now hearing that Sparklebox has been taken over by a legitimate company and that some schools are allowing its use again. Still blocked here - Essex - anyone know any more?

[boyboy]

Now hearing that Sparklebox has been taken over by a legitimate company and that some schools are allowing its use again. Still blocked here - Essex - anyone know any more?

I will be honest without knowing who the shareholders and directors etc I would not risk it in my school.

[localzuk]

Now hearing that Sparklebox has been taken over by a legitimate company and that some schools are allowing its use again. Still blocked here - Essex - anyone know any more?

The domain registration is still exactly the same as far as I can see. On something like this, I'd want a proper public announcement, rather than word of mouth type info.

[john]

Has @GrumbleDook heard anything on this?

[SimpleSi]

The thing that really gets to me is that when I tell teachers about the current information that is available in the public domain - they don't care

If Lancs aren't blocking it - they'll use it

I, personally, will have nothing to do with it and point blank refuse to help with any issues with it - all you can do is try and educate and vote with your feet.

I feel very sad about the situation

Si

[SimpleSi]

On something like this, I'd want a proper public announcement, rather than word of mouth type info.

Due to libel law being on the side of people that some would allege have done bad things, this is never going to happen

If I was involved in a company where a person involved with it was convicted of certain offences, I'd be going out of my way to clear the air and say that that person wasn't involved anymore.

I've not seen anything to that effect but of course that doesn't allegedly mean anything and nothing can be inferred from the lack of a statement

Si

Si

[GrumbleDook]

I have not had anything mentioned yet. NEN Tech Group have been meeting and so if any of the other RBCs know anything they are likely to pass it on through there.

I will ask and see what the response is, but until anything is confirmed then we will be recommending that no change is made to blocking it or dissuading staff from using it.

[LisaW]

Thanks for replies - just looking for clear facts to counteract the rumours!
Lisa

[LeMarchand]

The thing that really gets to me is that when I tell teachers about the current information that is available in the public domain - they don't care

Yep - they'd rather feather the nest of a convicted paedophile that make some effort themselves. Recently found one with the toolbar loaded - this being one of "those" who can't understand why she is always getting viruses*...

*In the interest of clarity, AFAIK the toolbar is not a "bad 'un" - just illustrating the type of person.

[SimpleSi]

I think the words that stop you getting sued is "convicted downloader of inappropriate images of children"

Si

[LeMarchand]

My description was good enough for the BBC (and many other sites), but I'll change it if there are still objections.