Should we make LB an 18+ website?

Has anyone said "strawman" yet?

Has anyone said "strawman" yet?

[Ginge]

nah, rant prefer hypocritically throwin out ad hominem cuz he think it makes him sound mor cultured ahaha

---------- Post added at 10:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:19 PM ----------

rant, if u wer so sure of da legalities surroundin da issue, n ur primary concern was da wellbein of da site, you'd be writin dis shit up 2 admin, not tryna save face by insecurely tryin 2 assert ur intellectual dominance over a brere who frequents dis site 2 rite about how long his schlong is ahahahaha

---------- Post added at 10:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 PM ----------

"With no age restriction, or mention to age outside of the small section in the privacy policy, you tread risky waters legally as the site owner in regard to COPPA, and the new reformations to the GDPR in Europe. Something which has the capacity to shut down the site, something I don't want to see happen."
just make ur mind up as 2 wether u tryna protect da site, or seem clever fam, cuz if u rite about da risk of da site bein shut down, my point was y not just rite 2 mods or admin? y enter a discussion wen u sure u dun the research,
2 make every1 think u a hero genius?
dats sum autistic shit rite dere,
point da strawman finger all u want but if u keepin on squabblin, AND u sure ur rite, ur further provin da point, go 2 da mods, go 2 da admin, if u make da change u can cum back n brag 4 ur pats on da back ahahaha

[Ginge]

nah, rant prefer hypocritically throwin out ad hominem cuz he think it makes him sound mor cultured ahaha

---------- Post added at 10:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:19 PM ----------

rant, if u wer so sure of da legalities surroundin da issue, n ur primary concern was da wellbein of da site, you'd be writin dis shit up 2 admin, not tryna save face by insecurely tryin 2 assert ur intellectual dominance over a brere who frequents dis site 2 rite about how long his schlong is ahahahaha

---------- Post added at 10:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 PM ----------

"With no age restriction, or mention to age outside of the small section in the privacy policy, you tread risky waters legally as the site owner in regard to COPPA, and the new reformations to the GDPR in Europe. Something which has the capacity to shut down the site, something I don't want to see happen."
just make ur mind up as 2 wether u tryna protect da site, or seem clever fam, cuz if u rite about da risk of da site bein shut down, my point was y not just rite 2 mods or admin? y enter a discussion wen u sure u dun the research,
2 make every1 think u a hero genius?
dats sum autistic shit rite dere,
point da strawman finger all u want but if u keepin on squabblin, AND u sure ur rite, ur further provin da point, go 2 da mods, go 2 da admin, if u make da change u can cum back n brag 4 ur pats on da back ahahaha

[Ginge]

nah nice try squirmin out, u were referencin my use of da word incontrovertibly, as in undisputably, shit dont work in da context, tag team here's ur straw man shit, not 2 mention proof of my point dat rant's priority is tryna act clever n big, not improvin da site ahaha

---------- Post added at 10:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Rant

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/de.../inconvertibly

---------- Post added at 05:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:36 PM ----------



Tagged mods to the thread. So, I have "written the mods." But, that doesn't negate that it's a topic of discussion that should be talked about openly among the entirety of the site, and not just amongst myself and the mods. You're welcome to your opinion. Absolutely. ANd I'm welcome to counter it. No point getting emotional, just because "You're sensitive" wasn't a strong retort to, "There's the potential for a legal issue."

ahaha, u cleerly got uncomfortable n started bitchfittin as soon as sum1 disagreed with u, go rite up ur report fam

[Ginge]

nah nice try squirmin out, u were referencin my use of da word incontrovertibly, as in undisputably, shit dont work in da context, tag team here's ur straw man shit, not 2 mention proof of my point dat rant's priority is tryna act clever n big, not improvin da site ahaha

---------- Post added at 10:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Rant

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/de.../inconvertibly

---------- Post added at 05:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:36 PM ----------



Tagged mods to the thread. So, I have "written the mods." But, that doesn't negate that it's a topic of discussion that should be talked about openly among the entirety of the site, and not just amongst myself and the mods. You're welcome to your opinion. Absolutely. ANd I'm welcome to counter it. No point getting emotional, just because "You're sensitive" wasn't a strong retort to, "There's the potential for a legal issue."

ahaha, u cleerly got uncomfortable n started bitchfittin as soon as sum1 disagreed with u, go rite up ur report fam

Originally Posted by Ginge

nah nice try squirmin out, u were referencin my use of da word incontrovertibly, as in undisputably, shit dont work in da context, tag team here's ur straw man shit, not 2 mention proof of my point dat rant's priority is tryna act clever n big, not improvin da site ahaha

---------- Post added at 10:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 PM ----------



ahaha, u cleerly got uncomfortable n started bitchfittin as soon as sum1 disagreed with u, go rite up ur report fam

inconvertible
ADJECTIVE
1Not able to be changed in form, function, or character.

Sooo, it doesn't work in the context?

Originally Posted by Ginge

nah nice try squirmin out, u were referencin my use of da word incontrovertibly, as in undisputably, shit dont work in da context, tag team here's ur straw man shit, not 2 mention proof of my point dat rant's priority is tryna act clever n big, not improvin da site ahaha

---------- Post added at 10:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 PM ----------



ahaha, u cleerly got uncomfortable n started bitchfittin as soon as sum1 disagreed with u, go rite up ur report fam

inconvertible
ADJECTIVE
1Not able to be changed in form, function, or character.

Sooo, it doesn't work in the context?

[Ginge]

Originally Posted by Rant

inconvertible
ADJECTIVE
1Not able to be changed in form, function, or character.

Sooo, it doesn't work in the context?

not really g ahaha

---------- Post added at 10:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:42 PM ----------

i welcome any1 else 2 engage in rant's 'discussion' so long as u reddy 2 congratulate him on his efforts, n stroke his intellectual ego ahahaha

[Ginge]

Originally Posted by Rant

inconvertible
ADJECTIVE
1Not able to be changed in form, function, or character.

Sooo, it doesn't work in the context?

not really g ahaha

---------- Post added at 10:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:42 PM ----------

i welcome any1 else 2 engage in rant's 'discussion' so long as u reddy 2 congratulate him on his efforts, n stroke his intellectual ego ahahaha

Originally Posted by Ginge

not really g ahaha

---------- Post added at 10:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:42 PM ----------

i welcome any1 else 2 engage in rant's 'discussion' so long as u reddy 2 congratulate him on his efforts, n stroke his intellectual ego ahahaha

Cool story, bro.

Originally Posted by Ginge

not really g ahaha

---------- Post added at 10:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:42 PM ----------

i welcome any1 else 2 engage in rant's 'discussion' so long as u reddy 2 congratulate him on his efforts, n stroke his intellectual ego ahahaha

Cool story, bro.

[Ginge]

Originally Posted by Rant

Cool story, bro.

witness da peak of his wit, wen his big words aint scare sum1 off ahaha
seein as u got nothin 2 add 2 da argument but debatin semantics 2 save face...
fuck off u fat autistic cunt

[Ginge]

Originally Posted by Rant

Cool story, bro.

witness da peak of his wit, wen his big words aint scare sum1 off ahaha
seein as u got nothin 2 add 2 da argument but debatin semantics 2 save face...
fuck off u fat autistic cunt

[Erk]

The legal issue may be debateable. Like.. Idk, places like here at least... The age of consent is 16, but the legal drinking age is 18. I knowyour guys' age of consent is 18 with the drinking age being 21. Sooo idk. May vary depending on what end of the world? I havent read anything about the issue though other then the thread.

[Erk]

The legal issue may be debateable. Like.. Idk, places like here at least... The age of consent is 16, but the legal drinking age is 18. I knowyour guys' age of consent is 18 with the drinking age being 21. Sooo idk. May vary depending on what end of the world? I havent read anything about the issue though other then the thread.

Originally Posted by Erk

The legal issue may be debateable. Like.. Idk, places like here at least... The age of consent is 16, but the legal drinking age is 18. I knowyour guys' age of consent is 18 with the drinking age being 21. Sooo idk. May vary depending on what end of the world? I havent read anything about the issue though other then the thread.

This is true, the age of consent varies based on location. As denoted by Whatsapp's age restriction being shifted to 16 in Europe(still 13 in the U.S.) to avoid the aforementioned issues with the GDRP. That said, the aide to this point is to use the "blanket" international age of consent. Which is 18. This is expressed in the privacy policy, in that aspect, as previously referenced(children referred to as those under 18). But, shifting this to the point of data collection, I'll posit again, without the measures to make some determination of age, how can this data collection be refrained from in regard to children?

Originally Posted by Erk

The legal issue may be debateable. Like.. Idk, places like here at least... The age of consent is 16, but the legal drinking age is 18. I knowyour guys' age of consent is 18 with the drinking age being 21. Sooo idk. May vary depending on what end of the world? I havent read anything about the issue though other then the thread.

This is true, the age of consent varies based on location. As denoted by Whatsapp's age restriction being shifted to 16 in Europe(still 13 in the U.S.) to avoid the aforementioned issues with the GDRP. That said, the aide to this point is to use the "blanket" international age of consent. Which is 18. This is expressed in the privacy policy, in that aspect, as previously referenced(children referred to as those under 18). But, shifting this to the point of data collection, I'll posit again, without the measures to make some determination of age, how can this data collection be refrained from in regard to children?

[Erk]

Originally Posted by Rant

This is true, the age of consent varies based on location. As denoted by Whatsapp's age restriction being shifted to 16 in Europe(still 13 in the U.S.) to avoid the aforementioned issues with the GDRP. That said, the aide to this point is to use the "blanket" international age of consent. Which is 18. This is expressed in the privacy policy, in that aspect, as previously referenced(children referred to as those under 18). But, shifting this to the point of data collection, I'll posit again, without the measures to make some determination of age, how can this data collection be refrained from in regard to children?

That does make sense.. But shit like this .. In the grand scheme of things.. Is a rap battle website. Members like Suspie posting porn, is the members doing it. You got muhfuckas on IG and Facebook doing the same thing. And god dont get me started on Snapchat lmfao, I knoe they have age restrictions.. But theyre like 14, 15 or something, and have a much higher risk of having pornographic content and pedophilic members then Letsbeef does. Sure we got Suspie and Gooch. But we dont have random men messaging every girl on the site like "Send bobs and vagane" ya know? I feel like LB would be safe from legal action

---------- Post added at 07:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:17 PM ----------

Especially seeing as our IM doesnt allow pics. Just the forums do.

[Erk]

Originally Posted by Rant

This is true, the age of consent varies based on location. As denoted by Whatsapp's age restriction being shifted to 16 in Europe(still 13 in the U.S.) to avoid the aforementioned issues with the GDRP. That said, the aide to this point is to use the "blanket" international age of consent. Which is 18. This is expressed in the privacy policy, in that aspect, as previously referenced(children referred to as those under 18). But, shifting this to the point of data collection, I'll posit again, without the measures to make some determination of age, how can this data collection be refrained from in regard to children?

That does make sense.. But shit like this .. In the grand scheme of things.. Is a rap battle website. Members like Suspie posting porn, is the members doing it. You got muhfuckas on IG and Facebook doing the same thing. And god dont get me started on Snapchat lmfao, I knoe they have age restrictions.. But theyre like 14, 15 or something, and have a much higher risk of having pornographic content and pedophilic members then Letsbeef does. Sure we got Suspie and Gooch. But we dont have random men messaging every girl on the site like "Send bobs and vagane" ya know? I feel like LB would be safe from legal action

---------- Post added at 07:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:17 PM ----------

Especially seeing as our IM doesnt allow pics. Just the forums do.