Membership Manual Change: Age Requirements Revised

[Zashara Sho'am]

Also apologies to some of y'all for bringing up some cringe memories that probably haven't been thought of in a decade or so.

 

[Elanda Tonil]

I joined when I was 15 and I never had any problems. The other youngsters I affiliated back then, that I was close enough to to discuss that type of thing, also never had problems. I believe the problem is largely something that can be mitigated, and I believe this community has virtues, has value for the membership here. I believe young people have a unique presence and can be a tremendous strength to a community. For me, this community got me through a quite difficult time in my life and gave me valuable skills, role models, and experiences that were a tremendous boon to my life and helped me develop an approach to life that has brought me long-term happiness. Honestly, to me this change feels like we're throwing in the towel and saying we have so little of substance nowadays to offer our membership that the movie nights for our current members are more important. I don't expect people to agree with me, and I'm not saying that is what the policy is intending to do. I am expressing sadness that if novice me were trying to join today, I wouldn't be able to, and my life would have been far emptier for it. It could be as simple as parallel membership for a parent or guardian (and probably limiting the minor to novice/recruit), sending a copy of PMs to a parent's email address, postponing access to the Discord server until age 18, etc. Again, I'm not demanding change, I am sad. Conversations noting the negative effects of a change aren't always an attack.

 

[Rhed al'Tere]

It could be as simple as parallel membership for a parent or guardian (and probably limiting the minor to novice/recruit),

This is what’s happening? The parent or guardian has to be a member and give permission for the minor.

 

[Polegnyn Nemeara]

Hopefully the parent would be willing to join, too, but can’t imagine that happening very often. My parents would not have joined if I wanted to join as a minor.

We already have the mentor program. Why not utilize that to ensure the safety of younger members as some kind of “foster parent”/supervisor? Include a “if someone does something inappropriate…” statement in their welcome message and that any inkling of untoward behavior would result in severe consequences.

 

[Satara al'Caelahn]

Include a “if someone does something inappropriate…” statement in their welcome message and that any inkling of untoward behavior would result in severe consequences.

I think that would be problematic in its own way. Would you join a forum where your welcome message included "if anyone tries to behave inappropriately toward you...?" That makes it sound like it's a huge probability, especially if it's not in line with the rest of the welcome message.

"Here's how to become a member. Here's your administrator. Here's a link to the membership manual. Oh, and watch out for [trigger warning] pedophilia."

I would run as far and as fast as I could.

And before anyone comes at me, yes I realize that I'm being a bit hyperbolic here. I know that's not how we'd phrase something like that in a welcome message, but there's a fine line between reminding people that certain conduct is innappropriate and making it sound likely to happen regularly.

 

[Polegnyn Nemeara]

I don’t like having to include it either but they would know what to do if it does happen. I understand previous incidents weren’t reported, but at least it shows they have an ally if it does, is taken seriously, and dealt with.

 

[Morgana Arakos]

.

 

[Delara Morellin]

Just so I'm clear as to what this actually entails: are we proposing that minors still have access to the WoT "fansite" side of the community (book / show discussions) but not any of the "social club" side of it (aka, Citizenry and beyond)?

I don't like the thought of excluding anyone but as much as I think @Polegnyn Nemeara's idea of using the Mentor system to protect minors is a noble one, I do worry about what kind of legal liability that might open the site up to. I have no knowledge of US law beyond the bits I picked up on Ally McBeal but here in England, I believe most (if not all) volunteer roles involving children require you to have some level of police checks.

Again, it's unfortunate if we have to say no to a section of the populace through no fault of their own but unless I'm missing something, I don't know how adding that level of safeguarding responsibility to the community would work.

 

[Raeviendha al'Toma]

A couple of disclaimers... first.... I am not in any way knowledgeable about legal stuff. Second, I've never been in the situation some of you have sadly been in as far as online harassment, I was already grown when the internets came out. Thirdly, I've been a bit hit or miss here on activity lately so I don't really know the current membership climate.

All of that being said, I am sad that it is felt by the Board, or whomever made this decision, that the possibility for harassment is so great the need for age restriction is even a thing. I have been incredibly lucky that 99.9% of my interaction here has been great.
I know that this has been a safe place for many people during my membership. As I was reading the previous comments and seeing that some have been harassed/groomed/abused, I was thinking, well, is it a safe place then? If something like that occurs even once, that's way too much.
I can also see that reporting harassment or just feeling ick would be a difficult decision. Stepping forward with something like that has to be really scary.

I hate to see the age of membership restricted, but I also think it isn't exactly appropriate for 12 year olds to be here. I think teenagers nowadays (waves cane) are so much different, they are smart in a way I never would imagine. Would there be any legal statements that could be included to indicate that while the possiblity isn't zero, there is some infintesimal chance of interacting with possible creeps? That by using the forums you take that into consideration and understand that reporting inappropriateness is highly encouraged and expected? If there is an influx of teenage members could there be a specific area for them? Like a training ground type thing, but more heavily moderated? Could their access be limited as far as OWaH or other areas that tend to be a bit less moderated?

 

[Satara al'Caelahn]

If there is an influx of teenage members could there be a specific area for them? Like a training ground type thing, but more heavily moderated? Could their access be limited as far as OWaH or other areas that tend to be a bit less moderated?

We've already made changes that require members to be 18 to move from Novice/Recruit to Accepted/Soldier rank as seen here: https://www.tarvalon.net/index.php?threads/updated-raising-requirements.50349/

So the way I see it, we already require most of our membership to be at least 18. Only Citizens to Novice/Recruits would even be at risk of being a minor already, so minors already don't have access to any Tower Sworn places.

But that being said, since we do require members to be at least 18 to become Accepted/Soldier, this change really only means registered members, Citizens, and Novice/Recruits must also be at least 18.

 

[Morgana Arakos]

Removed my earlier, less caffeinated response. Now that I've had coffee, a better one:

I'm okay with this, and agree it makes sense. I was groomed by a creep when I first joined, he visited me in person when I was 15, and it's only by luck and my friends not leaving me alone with him that nothing terrible happened. 18+ seems like a wise move to me. I do worry about people lying about their age and then us not knowing who's underage and that creating issues, but I suppose that's not really something we can do anything about. It does make me sad we need to do this -- I benefited a lot from being a member here as a teen -- but I also know a lot of us who joined early were put in very vulnerable positions as a result, and I don't want that to happen to anyone else.

 

[Raeviendha al'Toma]

We've already made changes that require members to be 18 to move from Novice/Recruit to Accepted/Soldier rank as seen here: https://www.tarvalon.net/index.php?threads/updated-raising-requirements.50349/

So the way I see it, we already require most of our membership to be at least 18. Only Citizens to Novice/Recruits would even be at risk of being a minor already, so minors already don't have access to any Tower Sworn places.

But that being said, since we do require members to be at least 18 to become Accepted/Soldier, this change really only means registered members, Citizens, and Novice/Recruits must also be at least 18.

Ahhh gotcha... sorry, I totally blanked on that.

 

[Lithiel Morn]

Would there be any legal statements that could be included to indicate that while the possiblity isn't zero, there is some infintesimal chance of interacting with possible creeps? That by using the forums you take that into consideration and understand that reporting inappropriateness is highly encouraged and expected?​

I think this is just... the rule of the internet, I guess? On the internet as a space, no matter where you go, the chance of encountering creeps and negative experiences may even be infinitesimal (depending on the community), but it's never zero and I can't think of what could be done (that isn't already being done, at least here) to make it zero. I think - or I hope - that everyone who is on the internet knows this and accepts it as a possibility.​

 

[Polegnyn Nemeara]

I think this is just... the rule of the internet, I guess? On the internet as a space, no matter where you go, the chance of encountering creeps and negative experiences may even be infinitesimal (depending on the community), but it's never zero and I can't think of what could be done (that isn't already being done, at least here) to make it zero. I think - or I hope - that everyone who is on the internet knows this and accepts it as a possibility.​

+1 Places my teenagers and I frequent have an "required to be 13yo or parental consent" in their user agreement.

Eta: my underage teenager, at least. Sorry, still in denial over here..

 

[Cinna Vrammar]

So personally I do think this site should be catering more to its existing adult membership than to potential youth - we should not need to make this a "safe space" for minors, and should not have to police the things we say or what movies we have events to watch or whatever for their sake - but, I feel also that this is a misguided plan.

You know what having rules about age and needing parental permission for online spaces does? It incentivizes lying about your age in order to gain access to a space that you want access to. How do I know? Because I did it, way back in my Neopets days. I lied about my birthday in order to be able to use their guilds/chat features. I couldn't be bothered to ask my parents' permission (in large part because I expected they'd refuse in their overprotective way, but also because the process of them giving permission seemed overly convoluted) and I didn't want to wait until I was 13 or whatever.

The thing about the internet is that it's very anonymous. Yes, we have a process to make someone real to be raised Tower Sworn - which amounts to seeing their face (which could be faked), hearing their voice (also could be faked), and getting their "real name" (which could still be a lie). No one is checking IDs, and also you don't have to be made real to be a citizen. Technically, and this isn't intended to scare people but just to be real about the world we live in, there is a possibility that there are a number of people in our Tower Sworn who aren't who they claim they are. Anyone who has never been to a live event could be sus, basically - because if you're communicating over any form of technology, someone with enough tech know-how could fake their identity completely. And teens absolutely can have that know-how - a lot of them are more tech savvy than adults.

In the same way as I lied about my age to get on Neopets, we could have kids take advantage of the anonymity of the internet and choose to lie about their age in order to hang out with us. They'll say they're 18 or 19 when they're 14 or whatever. They'll get close to people... and eventually someone might find out that they lied. That someone could be a predator - they say they'll protect them, that they won't snitch, that it'll just be their little secret, but in return the minor has to do something for them. The rest of the site doesn't know and can't make an effort to protect them. That minor feels they can't go to anyone else on the site if they get themselves into trouble with someone sketchy because then they have to reveal that they've been breaking the rules, and the consequences of that could be not being allowed to stay, when they've built up other friendships or this is the only place they've found belonging or any number of other things.

Sure, the liability isn't on the site then - but morally, do you think that's ok? Does it sit ok with you to know that you could possibly doubly victimize someone - first to make them a target of a predator, and second to make them unable to seek help - just because they broke a rule meant to protect them? I don't. I fear that we're more likely to hurt kids with this rule change than by leaving the rules in place as they were. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Alexstrasz Ruskein]

Sometimes there are rumors for YEARS about members, but no reports were ever made. Without reports, it’s hard to act. I speak from experience on this, unfortunately. And we can’t expect inappropriate behavior to be 100% reported when it happens, leaving Creep Gaidin to continue to take advantage of underage folx.

Some of y'all weren't here for the mid 2000s where there were a number of teenage girls and almost all of us (I turned 18 a few months after joining) were creeped on and didn't fully understand it or feel comfortable reporting it. I can think of at least 10 of us without difficulty who faced that issue.

All of that being said, I am sad that it is felt by the Board, or whomever made this decision, that the possibility for harassment is so great the need for age restriction is even a thing. I have been incredibly lucky that 99.9% of my interaction here has been great.
I know that this has been a safe place for many people during my membership. As I was reading the previous comments and seeing that some have been harassed/groomed/abused, I was thinking, well, is it a safe place then? If something like that occurs even once, that's way too much.

Also the optics to be seen of the creep; every time it's been mentioned; being made male.
Also the apparent prioritization of a member who would have been here long enough to have made Gaidin at all continuing to be raised with "vague rumours" etc. I understand these are generalizations but if even the way we're discussing this hypothetically is so charged...

You're right about the optics. Thank you for the reminder that our words help mold the way we see the world, and can mask the bad behavior of those who don't fit a stereotype.

However, at least some (perhaps all) of those saying/implying male, saying "Gaidin," have a very specific former member in mind, who was banned when he admitted to/was arrested for/convicted of pedophilia. And I know that he isn't the only member (former or otherwise) who was some variety of creep; he's just THE example that comes to mind.

So this really isn't hypothetical at all. It isn't that the possibility is so great; it's that the possibility of it happening again still exists, without age restrictions.

But these days you aren't going to have the kind of teen representation as back in the day. The regulation of the internet and distribution of liability is different as well.

The demographics have shifted to be much older than it was back then, and there's a difference between teens joining a place with many 20-25 year olds and teens joining with many 30+ year old adults.

I understand the sadness some folx have about this change. There are a lot of people who have expressed, both in this thread and elsewhere, how much this site meant to them growing up, who have incredibly fond memories and lifelong friendships that started in their teens on this site. Many people have talked about how they feel changed for the better by being a part of this community during formative years.

But nearly every one of those that come to mind supports this change. Most members who joined as teens were joining a community of teens/young adults. They were surrounded by peers in addition to adults that were young enough to be their siblings. Nowadays, teens who joined would be surrounded by adults that were old enough to be their parents. It wouldn't be the same experience anymore.

If even the members who joined as teens are saying, decades later, that this is a good change and the former situation wasn't safe for minors, then I hope the rest of the site can pay attention to that.

Sure, have more adult oriented activities. But a thriving community cannot deny or ignore the vibrancy of its younger demographic. Any community needs ideas to keep them engaged, too, whether online or one’s own local neighborhood.

Our neighborhood has lots of young families move into it all the time. The subdivision tries having a yearly pool party that always involves alcohol and enforces a 21+ year age requirement. How many families miss out getting to know people from even a quarter of the subdivision just because a handful of people are adamant about drinking? Do these families wait until their kids can left at home? Absolutely not. They don’t participate and end up moving away once the kids graduate high school. Who are they replaced by? Another young family and the cycle repeats itself. Even our local neighborhood would be so much closer if the Homeowner’s Association would understand having activities for the entire family in addition to adult activities is much more beneficial than solely adult-oriented activities.

Okay, but we aren't the neighborhood. We are the pool party. That may not make everyone happy, but it is the decision the site has made. Some of you mentioned new potential members coming from JCon. JCon-attendees are the neighborhood, or at least a part of it.

Regardless, teens don't need to be in an adult space. It's why many social media sites also have also have limits. This is an adult space, run by adults, with a focus on adults that is not specifically equipped or trained to handle those under 18. Thus, to be responsible, us rando adults on the internet should not be inviting them into this space.

Adults deserve their own spaces, to exist, to socialize, even to drink if they choose. To not have to worry about censoring themselves around children, to not have to feel like a babysitter. To just relax with friends. Including adults with RL children of their own.

And you know what? Some of us don't want pedophiles in those spaces with us. Even those of us who joined when we were already in our 30s. We don't want to watch someone obviously creeping on underage members for years, while being unable to do anything about it because all the publicly visible behavior is technically within site rules.

Without an age restriction, there are already almost no underage members anymore. With an age restriction, that sends a clear message to pedophiles that they aren't going to find their preferred victims here.

 

[Morgana Arakos]

.

 

[Morgana Arakos]

Edited my previous response here because I realized I'd misunderstood what happened.

@Alexstrasz Ruskein I'm pretty frustrated that you quoted the last sentence of my post out of context, to make it sound like I was primarily mourning the benefits of being here as an underage member, when in context my post was about how I am sad that this website is not safe for minors because I was groomed by someone I was close to here when I was a minor.

To be clear, I am sad that we need to do this, because it is sad that there are so many horrible people in this world. I shouldn't have had to experience trusting someone so much that I bonded them only to realize later that they were using me to access my teenage friends outside of this community when we all were literal children. There's a reason I'm not bonded to anyone today.

This is the full context of what I said:

Removed my earlier, less caffeinated response. Now that I've had coffee, a better one:

I'm okay with this, and agree it makes sense. I was groomed by a creep when I first joined, he visited me in person when I was 15, and it's only by luck and my friends not leaving me alone with him that nothing terrible happened. 18+ seems like a wise move to me. I do worry about people lying about their age and then us not knowing who's underage and that creating issues, but I suppose that's not really something we can do anything about. It does make me sad we need to do this -- I benefited a lot from being a member here as a teen -- but I also know a lot of us who joined early were put in very vulnerable positions as a result, and I don't want that to happen to anyone else.

 

[Alexstrasz Ruskein]

I'm happy to do so.

I literally grabbed it today; I never saw your older one. It's the last line of what you posted above. And I didn't miss the second part. I was trying to sympathize with the sadness that someone would understandably feel, but also to remind everyone reading that, for better or for worse, that experience wouldn't be here for any teens who joined today, even if we still allowed it.

There are a lot of people in this conversation that are busy mourning the old days without paying attention to what our current demographics even are. I included that entire sentence, not just the mourning bit, because it was an example of someone who was capable of mourning without letting that get in the way of keeping people safe. Not everyone I quoted was people I disagree with. I thought (and still think) that one sentence by itself made your position pretty clear.

However, reading back, the way I phrased my response makes it look like we're in disagreement, and that it's a response to you specifically instead of General You. I'll edit that for clarity, as well.

 

[Morgana Arakos]

Yes, I realized that. I removed my initial response and responded with a second one post after, but it looks like you were responding as I did that and we crossed wires. Thank you for editing. I'm sure you can understand why it might feel pretty awful to have that sentence taken out of context to make a point like that given what the rest of the post was about.