Forum age requirement.

[Titan Rising 2,156]

So here are my thoughts that are sure to be ostrisized by the majority of the people participating in this age discussion.

 

I have no doubt that many members will falsify their age to access the forums. Though, as previously mentioned, in doing so any liability is placed directly on the individual, rather than on the forums as a whole.

What "liability" are you referring to exactly? This is almost suggesting that there is a possibility that you could be sued if a child stumbled onto your website and read some material that they may or may not be suited for. The chances of a lawsuit being successful on that basis is comparable to winning the lottery.

 

The only real liability I see here is the outrage from parents, which is hardly a foundation to ban all children from the site.

 

They sure can, and there's absolutely nothing we can do about it.

So I have to assume this is not about ridding the site of "liabilities", but to remove the guilt of users posting things that aren't necessarily appropriate for children

 

Taking into account that many parents and guardians of younger children do in fact care about what content their children are exposed to on the internet, in addition to those who do consider what they view based upon a recommended or compulsory age limit, such a limit would effectively function as an indicator to those who wish to monitor what they or their children do and do not view. Moreover, a good deal of accountability for what is observed within the forums is shifted from the administration to the user themselves.

Again, what "accountability" are you referring to? The outrage from parents? What about the outrage of the parents of 13 or 14 year old girls that don't want them exposed to "NSFW fandom elements"? Why not just increase the age limit to 18 right now so that this age limit actually holds any real significance?

 

If a child finds his way onto the site he can easily overcome the age limit barrier, if you truly cared what content the child was exposed to you would keep this site clean instead of making constant acceptions to your own "family friendly" policy out of fear of ostricizing the perverted side of the fanbase.

 

However, as the forums have grown and evolved, it has become increasing clear to us that some aspects of the Brony fandom (such as risqué shipping, the discussion of NSFW fandom elements, etc..) tend to be more suited towards that of a teen to adult audience, as opposed to those aged twelve and below.

I think this sums it up quite nicely. A good chuck of the forum goers here want to discuss "mature" topics, and so in order to please them and make them more comfortable in discussing these topics we get rid of the children, even if many of those children have made many positive contributions to this forum.

 

Honestly, and this is my opinion here so don't take it the wrong way, I find this absolutely disgusting.

[Lady Rarity Pony 4,894]

Just a quickie since I'm at work at the moment, but the age restriction is not gong to have any impact what so ever on rule enforcement and such. We are still uninterested in having 'mature' or otherwise NSFW content, threads, or boards.

 

Business as usual.

 

Glad you made mention of this. The age restriction was inevitably gonna be used to defend 'mature' content posting.

[XrosOver 613]

This is a need precaution to protect the forums and those whose memberships reside inside. I'm behind this 100%.

[Pinkazoid 3,493]

I am beyond happy this rule has been put into play. I have nothing against maturaty per say, (as the 12 year old user -Crazymisty- was actually really amazing) but the legal matter for the forums is well accepted into my head.

As you said, yeah, people can just lie. But no foul on the forum for someone lying.

 

Yeah, I'm pretty happy about the rule, but I forgot Misty was only 12 years old, I talked to him quite a while, but I imagined he was already 13 xD

 

He'll be back in about 6 or 5 months

[Lady Rarity Pony 4,894]

So here are my thoughts that are sure to be ostrisized by the majority of the people participating in this age discussion.

 

 

 

What "liability" are you referring to exactly? This is almost suggesting that there is a possibility that you could be sued if a child stumbled onto your website and read some material that they may or may not be suited for. The chances of a lawsuit being successful on that basis is comparable to winning the lottery.

 

The only real liability I see here is the outrage from parents, which is hardly a foundation to ban all children from the site.

 

I suppose the liability would be having incidents such as what happened to Ol' Sarge where you get an angry father attempting to ruin your reputation, calling you a pervert after hunting down your phone number and then threatening to call the local police on you. :V

 

This is also the norm for websites. 13 years of age without parental guidance. That's the law.

[Tol'Satha 163]

I'm happy with this. Kids dont belong on the internet, atleast not without supervision, and what happened to Ol' Sarge really sucked and was undeserved. I'd hate it if something like that happened to someone again, because some ignorant parent decided to leave a 7 year old alone on the internet. That dad that called sarge deserves a good slap.

Edited August 8, 2012 by Tol'Satha

[My little pwny 1,392]

Can members under 13 still PM? What else is restricted other than not being able to post and such???

[Titan Rising 2,156]

I suppose the liability would be having incidents such as what happened to Ol' Sarge where you get an angry father attempting to ruin your reputation, calling you a pervert after hunting down your phone number and then threatening to call the local police on you. :V

 

This is also the norm for websites. 13 years of age without parental guidance. That's the law.

 

I'm pretty sure there's no law saying websites need to have an age restriction...

 

And I fail to see how what happened to Ol' Sarge could have been prevented had this age restriction been put in place. The same exact thing could have happened with an angry parent of a 13, 14, or 15 year old, not to mention she would have more than likely circumvented the age restriction to get on the site anyway.

 

Anyone who puts their phone number online so people can access it are putting their reputation at risk. I'm sorry, but what happened to Ol' Sarge was ultimately on him. Even children are smart enough to know not to put their personal information out on the internet.

[PonyEcho 1,610]

 

i agree with you 94%

the issues with the ol sarge situation was his action and the fact he was unaware to the other members age so perhaps a filly badge would be a better way to go

or we could age restrict certain threads

[Lady Rarity Pony 4,894]

 

In the United States, this is active.

 

Minimum age of 13. I'm sure not everyone here is from the US, but this should still be followed.

[My little pwny 1,392]

i agree with you 94%

the issues with the ol sarge situation was his action and the fact he was unaware to the other members age so perhaps a filly badge would be a better way to go

or we could age restrict certain threads

 

I wish this is what the mods would do. Allow the welcoming plaza, show discussion boards and a few other sub forums to under 13. Or maybe just make a totally different website like fillyforums.com for those under 13. Those who turn 13 get to keep their post count and name, but they can never post again to the 13 and under site.

[Zoop 8,384]

 

In the United States, this is active.

 

Minimum age of 13. I'm sure not everyone here is from the US, but this should still be followed.

 

Looks like LRP beat me to it.

 

While it is possible to have people under thirteen on the site while remaining in compliance with COPPA, the amount of paperwork involved is quite frankly not worth Feld0's time, which would be better spent improving the site, not jumping through legal hoops for the sake of allowing an extreme minority - a minority that this community never intended to focus on - to register here.

[Haven Celestii 9,385]

I think its more about keeping the kids safe though Kirby, Very few things they could do to get the forums in trouble.

 

Whatever its more about is fine with me either way. Both are perfectly good reasons for adding this rule.

[PonyEcho 1,610]

I wish this is what the mods would do. Allow the welcoming plaza, show discussion boards and a few other sub forums to under 13. Or maybe just make a totally different website like fillyforums.com for those under 13. Those who turn 13 get to keep their post count and name, but they can never post again to the 13 and under site.

 

yeah i was thinking more of a badge the indicated that you're under 13 so that people can bring that into consideration when speaking to them and allow a kind of age limit for threads that are not safe for them, that way everyone wins, (but that's down to whether or not the mod can do it or if they want to even give it a try)

[Titan Rising 2,156]

In the United States, this is active.

 

Minimum age of 13. I'm sure not everyone here is from the US, but this should still be followed.

 

The site is hosted in Canada I believe so I'm not sure that law applies, but that's beside the point. If this was the real issue behind it I would expect them to have said so, but they're implying that they had a choice here so I doubt that they were forced to put this age limit by law

 

Looks like LRP beat me to it.

 

While it is possible to have people under thirteen on the site while remaining in compliance with COPPA, the amount of paperwork involved is quite frankly not worth Feld0's time, which would be better spent improving the site, not jumping through legal hoops for the sake of allowing an extreme minority - a minority that this community never intended to focus on - to register here.

 

If that's the case then fine, although I wonder why no age limit/parental consent was necessary beforehand if that's truly the reason behind this, and why you waited until now to implement it

 

And in the future, you guys could save me a lot of time by just saying "it's the law" instead of dancing around it

Edited August 8, 2012 by Hollowshield

[MVC NVMXD JVRXD 2,406]

I wish this is what the mods would do. Allow the welcoming plaza, show discussion boards and a few other sub forums to under 13. Or maybe just make a totally different website like fillyforums.com for those under 13. Those who turn 13 get to keep their post count and name, but they can never post again to the 13 and under site.

 

If you have an under 13 site that would only attract pedophiles or creepy people, you can still lie about your age there too.

[Twilight Sparkle ✨ 8,529]

The site is hosted in Canada I believe so I'm not sure that law applies, but that's beside the point.

 

Although MLP Forums is a Canadian site, my server is located in the US, so US jurisdiction does apply.

 

A lot more went into the decision than just complying with the law. That's why the OP didn't focus on COPPA.

[Titan Rising 2,156]

Although MLP Forums is a Canadian site, my server is located in the US, so US jurisdiction does apply.

 

A lot more went into the decision than just complying with the law. That's why the OP didn't focus on COPPA.

 

Very well then. I would have appreciated if COPPA was mentioned at all in the OP for clarity, but if this is an issue with the law then there's nothing more for me to say here - even if that issue is just doing some extra paperwork. I've already given my opinion on all the other reasons.

[NavelColt 22,883]

Works for me. Though there are always exceptions to maturity of people under thirteen, legally it's stable and far more safe to have it thirteen and up.

[Dark Qiviut 22,656]

The site is hosted in Canada I believe so I'm not sure that law applies, but that's beside the point. If this was the real issue behind it I would expect them to have said so, but they're implying that they had a choice here so I doubt that they were forced to put this age limit by law

Although MLP Forums is a Canadian site, my server is located in the US, so US jurisdiction does apply.

Actually, COPPA does apply to international servers. Although this place is hosted in Canada, regardless of where it comes from or where the servers are hosted, the FCC requires international sites to comply with COPPA if online information from the U.S. can be reviewed and collected.

 

Regarding the topic at hand, I was rather surprised by the fact that such an age implementation didn't exist when I first noticed this forum. It's a shame that several users under thirteen had to have their accounts on hold, but if it means keeping the forum running and (God forbid) not have various staffers like Feld0 in legal trouble, so be it. The MLP Forums is a great place, and I don't want to see it taken down for COPPA violations.

Edited August 8, 2012 by Dark Qiviut

[False Perception 482]

I may be 19, and this doesn't effect me, but why should we exclude those the fandom was MEANT to have? I think a tighter leash on the NSFW content [(lol leash) LIKE THERE] and rounding it up into a place where members under X age can't browse. That would give us more freedom in our discussion of NSFW (yet I still support keeping the fences pretty) while keeping the forums open to those the show was intended for. At the moment, anyone under 10 may NEVER see this site without lying and the show being in it's prime, which would ultimately be our downfall. To ensure the survival of the forums we must breed the users that will be here to do the same, thus we should be shooting down NSFW content instead of pushing away younger members.

 

We do not inherit the Earth, yet we borrow it from our children.

[NotDavid_ 62]

I like this idea! But I do feel sorry for the younger ponies on the forum.

If you have an under 13 site that would only attract pedophiles or creepy people, you can still lie about your age there too.

 

Exactly! No one wants pedophiles on the forum! Or even over protected parents joining to watch there child.

[Zoop 8,384]

Honest question, Frenzy... Did you read the last few posts in this thread? We just confirmed that the age minimum is - in part - a legal requirement, and that we still have no plans for any 'mature content' areas.

[False Perception 482]

Honest question, Frenzy... Did you read the last few posts in this thread? We just confirmed that the age minimum is - in part - a legal requirement, and that we still have no plans for any 'mature content' areas.

 

Absolutely not. I completely lack the attention span for that. Although, that means that Hollow and Notdog didn't either, seeing as how they brohoofed it. Lol, jk. About them, not about not reading it.

 

So what, legal schemgal...

[notdog1996 315]

Absolutely not. I completely lack the attention span for that. Although, that means that Hollow and Notdog didn't either, seeing as how they brohoofed it. Lol, jk. About them, not about not reading it.

 

So what, legal schemgal...

 

I did read it. That does not mean I agree with a law I never heard of before this incident and that I never respected anyway (not knowing about it helps a lot).

Edited August 8, 2012 by notdog1996