Abolishing the 13 years of age rule

[root]

Hello, MC-Market.

I am making a suggestion due to one of my fellow Slashy_Hosting members being banned and I am annoyed at it to be honest, I am fed up with discrimination from appearance.

A recent example being PurpleStorms he was banned for "being underage" when I speak to one of the staff members the reason has reveled that they had not solid proof...
The proof behind the ban was `his appearance`

You may not trust me on this issue but I do have proof backing my end of support on this situation and I shall be providing it now, http://prntscr.com/fr7mxd

I don't want it completely abolished just make it so staff are aware that you need solid proof or a confession

I will not be naming the staff member who banned him as you can find that yourself but I would not like to start a war with staff on this issue.

If you are a community member please vote freely.
If you are a staff member please comment below with a detailed explanation on your judgement.

EDIT:
ALERT
Sorry, The title is worded wrong. It should be `Unpunished users with invalid proof`

Regards,
root

 

[root]

The forum has a obligation to act toward a law. If they have a clear suspicion that someone is younger then 13, then it's better for the staff to ban that person, rather then take the possible consequence. I'm pretty sure that he can prove his real age with a staff through webcam ID if he wishes to get back in.

So he needs to go through an appeal process due to the fact that staff are banning him on indirect proof.. Thats just like saying you look suspicious... YOU ARE GOING TO JAIL

----------

Im not sure. People who are young are generally inexperienced in websites which involve money alike this one and can sometimes be immature. The website, I guess, is trying to be as professional as possible and being younger than 13 may bring issues. This can sometimes involve being scammed or bullied etc. This for obvious reasons and is something that the owners would like to strive away from as it prevents hassle for them and the staff team aswell as the actual kid himself. This being said as it is attempting to be as professional as possible in a minecraft community this situation could've been dealt better. It is hard to see a very matured 12 year old and usually they cant uphold that visage for ever.

However, I do believe judging someone's appearance shouldn't determine their age, this isnt right as I know and understand that feeling as I look very young for my age. The action of banning him should only have taken place once the staff team had sufficient evidence to back themselves up against threads like these. This is a very hot topic but im sure once the staff team reply, they will have some sort of evidence which is deemed sufficient as I dont think a website of such caliber would make such a rookie mistake

Also if he was under 13 why would he publically post the only thing that could connect him to his age?

 

[Lyphiard]

This is not something we are doing to be mean. By law, MCM is required to get parental consent for all users under the age of 13 before storing personal information about them.

Through the link he posted, it made clear that he was under the age of 13 to the average, reasonable person. This isn't about edge cases or anything like that, because law almost always leans towards the view of an average, reasonable individual. If MCM sees that a user is underage, it is obligated to stop said user from accessing the service since we don't want to deal with the hassles of complying with COPPA.

If PurpleStorms is truly 13 or older, then he can provide proof through a support request and he will be unbanned. However, based on your reactions and your previous messages to me regarding this NDA, I'm going to assume he isn't and that you guys are just creating a commotion because he got banned.

 

[Theo J]

This is not something we are doing to be mean. By law, MCM is required to get parental consent for all users under the age of 13 before storing personal information about them.

Through the link he posted, it made clear that he was under the age of 13 to the average, reasonable person. This isn't about edge cases or anything like that, because law almost always leans towards the view of an average, reasonable individual. If MCM sees that a user is underage, it is obligated to stop said user from accessing the service since we don't want to deal with the hassles of complying with COPPA.

If PurpleStorms is truly 13 or older, then he can provide proof through a support request and he will be unbanned. However, based on your reactions and your previous messages to me regarding this NDA, I'm going to assume he isn't and that you guys are just creating a commotion because he got banned.

Just deny the suggestion.

 

[Theo J]

Pretty sure its law.

It is, which is why the suggestion should just be denied because the rule isn't going to change.

 

[J A M E S]

Luigical How can you possibly disagree with me on the fact that his voice was high pitched? If you're going to disagree with a fact, then why are you even contributing to this debate?

 

[root]

This is not something we are doing to be mean. By law, MCM is required to get parental consent for all users under the age of 13 before storing personal information about them.

Through the link he posted, it made clear that he was under the age of 13 to the average, reasonable person. This isn't about edge cases or anything like that, because law almost always leans towards the view of an average, reasonable individual. If MCM sees that a user is underage, it is obligated to stop said user from accessing the service since we don't want to deal with the hassles of complying with COPPA.

If PurpleStorms is truly 13 or older, then he can provide proof through a support request and he will be unbanned. However, based on your reactions and your previous messages to me regarding this NDA, I'm going to assume he isn't and that you guys are just creating a commotion because he got banned.

So what you are saying is if he wants to be unbanned he needs parental consent before storing the data they MANUALLY put in... llf

Anyways if its to stop bullying and that you have moderators.

And COPPA should just be followed and allow the hundreds of people you ban to be allowed back on because you are losing members permanently due to this..

Yeah.
I think that they wouldn't have it if it was legal, take for instance Facebook, you have to be 13+, they wouldn't have that rule if it wasn't law, but they do because it is law.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/38-of-kids-on-facebook-are-under-the-minimum-age-of-13/

No one is judging anybody from appearances, the staff member of which you refuse to name however is featured in a screenshot has a valid reason. If a member of which at the age of 12 for example; and they sign up. They have to acknowledge the rules, he broke one a suffers consequences. I mean if you're 5ft 6 and a ride states you have to be 6ft, you dont just go on the ride. The point I am trying to make is that, yes they may not be any hard proof evidence but if your friend is below the age of thirteen he shouldn't be here. Not because of he's 'appearance' but due to he's behaviors. If someone is twelve, and they scatter the forums they may not be aware of certain content, especially half of the things some people come out with, he shouldn't experience such behaviours.

Well they have if you were only 5ft 6 they can have ways to check that. With this situation nothing was done to check his age...
If he was outside and he threw a rock and smashed a window would they let him away with it because his age? No... Just like if he is over 13 and throws it will they let him away with it? Exactly...

 

[Capri]

The main problem that I can foresee coming if they abolish the age limit rule, is a bunch of 12 year old kids coming on here without a clue on how the forum works or trying to scam. I personally don't think that it is OK to ban someone based off appearance though. There should be solid evidence showing that the user is underage.

 

[root]

Luigical How can you possibly disagree with me on the fact that his voice was high pitched? If you're going to disagree with a fact, then why are you even contributing to this debate?

Oh no! His prepubetic voice! He has not gone through it yet meaning his voice will be higher pitched than those who have.

The main problem that I can foresee coming if they abolish the age limit rule, is a bunch of 12 year old kids coming on here without a clue on how the forum works or trying to scam. I personally don't think that it is OK to ban someone based off appearance though. There should be solid evidence showing that the user is underage.

What person deals with a 12 year old if they do not have rep...

I know people who are underage on the forums and have quite a decent amount of REP I shall not be stating their names to keep their identity hidden. Some have now passed 13 and nobody has ever said anything about it...

 

[root]

They do, I am surprised that they banned him off what he looks, unless it is quite obvious.
I have tried to get a guy banned for it, because he was a scammer but I had no proof of that but I had a little proof, I showed a picture of him, but then he got banned for scamming, so yeah.

Also someone was really immature and acted as if he was 12, but they said that wasn't enough proof which is good.

They cannot ban without enough proof, if you saw the picture he would probably look really young, but you can't unless the user allows us to see it.

In conclusion this rule will 100% not be abolished, and they already do need enough proof of it, unless for instance, like in this case, it is a picture which is quite obvious that the person is under 13. If he did get banned, he could provide proof that he was over 13, like showing something like a passport or something, or a form like that.

I think we can all agree, literally no one likes this rule. A user that got another popular user banned a few months ago for being 12 got SO much hate for getting him banned, non stop. I think he ended up quiting MC-M but don't quote me on that.

We would all like this rule to be abolished, but it simply can not happen because of law, unless you have such a good lawyer and such a good reason, I highly doubt it would ever happen.

If he is 13-14 he isnt going to randomly have his passport or a driving license with him is he.... What proof do you think he could get them tbh..

Nothing was done to check he's age due to, if he was legitimately over the age of 13 or of that age he can appeal and show proof. You stated 'If he was outside and he threw a rock and smashed a window would they let him away with it because his age? No...' And no your contradicting yourself here, regardless of your age from 12+ they would be considered a young offender. But that has nothing to do with the situation, and you put 'Just like if he is over 13 and throws it will they let him away with it? Exactly...' I don't see what you intend? Elaborate..

What I am trying to say is that there is no proof of his age but he is punished in the same way that someone younger under the age limit would be punished.

mtw rits law canrt doi notghingf abourt rthat[DOUBLEPOST=1499114047]
[/DOUBLEPOST]ITS LAW DOCNQATN DO NOTHING AOGUBOUT TTHAT

Grr llf that is annoying to readdd haha

 

[Luigical]

Luigical How can you possibly disagree with me on the fact that his voice was high pitched? If you're going to disagree with a fact, then why are you even contributing to this debate?

I disagreed with what you are trying to imply. I don't care if he sounds like a 3-year-old girl. It doesn't prove his age whatsoever.

 

[root]

But they don't know who individually. They would try to get rid of them until they are 13 or older but they can't unless they show proof. Most people who are under 13 don't really use facebook, like me, when I was 10 I think, I had a facebook account, only ever used it for bonuses on games, never went on it for anything else.

That is you I know friends in real life including my girlfriend that is under 13 but has used facebook for years since she was 9. She has used it often and posted pictures since then...

I can go and get my passport from a cupboard in my house right now if you wanted me to.

Not everybody has a passport that is valid or actually has one..

 

[Capri]

What person deals with a 12 year old if they do not have rep...

That's not a valid excuse to abolish the rule, People could come on this website without a clue what rep is and/or deal with someone exclusively through the website. Doing this wouldn't reveal their age. I think for a forum like this to run smoothly they need to have mature members who can make calm, collected decisions. Not allowing 12 year old entitled brats to come on here and scam the first person they can get to fall into their trap.

I know people who are underage on the forums and have quite a decent amount of REP I shall not be stating their names to keep their identity hidden. Some have now passed 13 and nobody has ever said anything about it...

Those kids are obviously the exception, but they are still breaking a rule on this forum, and should be banned because of it. Rules are made to keep the community under control, and when people break those rules, they deserve to be banned for it.

Additionally, I don't think that your gripe is with the RULE, but with the staff who banned your friend, because without solid proof, the user shouldn't be banned. I 100% agree with you on that. But users who are under the age of 13 should not be on this forum (Just my opinion).