View Single Post
  #71  
Unread 12-05-2018, 10:19 PM
HVK HVK is on FIRE! 5+ wins in a row!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,501
Mentioned: 730 Post(s)
Tagged: 19 Thread(s)
Estimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.83/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.83/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.83/10 stars
Ranked Text Record
278 Won / 31 Lost
Exclusive Text Record
3 Won / 3 Lost
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rant View Post
Regardless of the age in question, 18, 13, 25, etc, I think the underlying issue is primarily the lack of age VERIFICATION. Restrictions totally aside. As I've previously expressed, without a verification system of some sort, there's no deterrent for the data collection from minors. Which is something that the privacy policy explicitly states the site doesn't do. In order to maintain that standing, it's important that there's some determinant of the age of the members, at least to administration. Even if that verification isn't publicly available information.


Edit: I, personally, still think the site should be 18+. But, my personal opinion aside, the previous remarks do still denote a pretty gaping hole in the site's policy. Even if I were to concede from my own standing.
NAH YOU DO RAISE A VALID POINT THAT X OR NOBLE MIGHT NOT OF ACTUALLY CONSIDERED...... DEFINATELY WORTH A DISCUSSION, THA LAW MAY CHANGE SOON ANYWAY WHERE WE ''HAVE'' TO DO AGE RESTRICTIONS, SHIT CHANGES ALL THA TIME AS X RECENTLY HAD TO ADD THA INFAMOUS ''DELETE YOUR ACCOUNT'' BUTTON LMAO
__________________
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-05-2018, 10:19 PM   #71
 
HVK HVK is on FIRE! 5+ wins in a row!
Estimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 0/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.83/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.83/10 starsEstimated Skill in Text: 7.83/10 stars
Ranked Text Record
278 Won / 31 Lost
Exclusive Text Record
3 Won / 3 Lost
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Voted: 139 audio / 3320 text
Posts: 3,501
Mentioned: 730 Post(s)
Tagged: 19 Thread(s)


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rant View Post
Regardless of the age in question, 18, 13, 25, etc, I think the underlying issue is primarily the lack of age VERIFICATION. Restrictions totally aside. As I've previously expressed, without a verification system of some sort, there's no deterrent for the data collection from minors. Which is something that the privacy policy explicitly states the site doesn't do. In order to maintain that standing, it's important that there's some determinant of the age of the members, at least to administration. Even if that verification isn't publicly available information.


Edit: I, personally, still think the site should be 18+. But, my personal opinion aside, the previous remarks do still denote a pretty gaping hole in the site's policy. Even if I were to concede from my own standing.
NAH YOU DO RAISE A VALID POINT THAT X OR NOBLE MIGHT NOT OF ACTUALLY CONSIDERED...... DEFINATELY WORTH A DISCUSSION, THA LAW MAY CHANGE SOON ANYWAY WHERE WE ''HAVE'' TO DO AGE RESTRICTIONS, SHIT CHANGES ALL THA TIME AS X RECENTLY HAD TO ADD THA INFAMOUS ''DELETE YOUR ACCOUNT'' BUTTON LMAO
__________________
Offline  
Reply With Quote