Membership Manual Change: Age Requirements Revised

[Alexstrasz Ruskein]

Wrt Discord, if we're going with the American movie ratings analogy, we're currently at PG-13. Porn is NC-17. There's a nice, happy medium of R in there, which is what I imagine we'll aim for.

 

[Amylia Lerato]

I'd like to say I completely support this change 100 percent. But for the sake of argument, we could instate a new role like "junior citizen" or something like that with limited access to forums no PMs except for moderators and the like. That way when they do turn 18 they could automatically automatically be raised to citizen without having to apply again. Completly agree with the age restriction just putting it out there as a suggestion.

 

[Leese Sulan]

The world online is a scary, scary place. Sex trafficking is huge. I dont like having to restrict anything- but I do want to minimize anyones ability to hurt a kid

^This. And the fact that many of us involved in underage things in the past on here thought it was harmless for us at the time when we were in it--that's why I feel there should be an age barrier. It took finding an explicit chat log on my computer created by other parties when they were visiting my house for me to snap awake that this was not ok at our young ages. It could have very easily gone down a super dark path from there.

 

[Viktara Fen]

I definitely put myself at risk plenty of times without realizing it when I was a minor, back in the early days of the Web and on AOL and BBSes before that. I am simply lucky that nothing bad ever happened to me. I also suspect that things have only gotten worse and more dangerous over the years for kids. As much as I'd love for us to be able to be more relaxed, based on experiences of mine from later on, after I became an adult, and on the stories people have told here, it seems very clear that we just cannot.

 

[Ruslan Rynar]

Food for thought...

I'm not sure if this is the correct spot to mention this, but since the age requirement is changing, I thought it might be a good place to talk about the language used to talk about the community, specifically the use of the term/phrase "family friendly." Instead of being inclusionary, "family-friendly" is often used to promote a very particular, 'traditional' heteronormative, cis-gendered, opposite-sex spouses with children kind of family; i.e., it is exclusionary. Said another way, family-friendly is code for members of the Queer/LGBTQ+ Community need not apply. I'm not saying that the community supports it, as it clearly does not, but that the language used to describe expectations is unintentionally coded.

I understand the desire to have some shorthand for no swearing, etc., but there are ways of stating that requirement that don't have a history of exclusion. In fact, it could be easier to explicitly state what kind of language is and isn't allowed.

Instead of American movie ratings, perhaps using video game ratings would be easier. Or simply a two-letter system such as "C" and "M" where "C" is for community, as in all members' posts have to be respectful of certain limits like no swearing. And "M," where mature content is allowed, and anyone using that forum/thread implicitly agrees to that condition by entering said thread/forum.

 

[Polegnyn Nemeara]

One further question: What is there to guarantee this age requirement doesn't keep getting changed? Will we be revisiting this topic again if it's decided content is only appropriate for 21yo+ or when people decide it's no longer appropriate for 40yo+s hanging out with 18yos?

 

[Viktara Fen]

I feel like this question is based in the assumption that the age requirement change was arbitrary. However, it wasn't arbitrary, to my knowledge: It very specifically restricted site membership to the age of legal adulthood in the United States, where the group is incorporated, or required parental consent for someone under that age to join the site. That's a specific remedy to a specific set of issues (e.g., liability, exposure of minors to certain content). So I'm not sure why it would seem likely that it would form the basis to any arbitrary change.

 

[Ruslan Rynar]

One further question: What is there to guarantee this age requirement doesn't keep getting changed? Will we be revisiting this topic again if it's decided content is only appropriate for 21yo+ or when people decide it's no longer appropriate for 40yo+s hanging out with 18yos?

My (limited) understanding was that due to the site/nonprofit being based in the U.S., the age change was made, in part, to make legal adulthood a condition of membership. Given that the change seems to be based on that context, I have a hard time imagining that there would be another change like the one you're suggesting.

As for appropriateness, I think that this is a decision that has to be made by each member. If a member is uncomfortable with the age difference, they can leave or request that certain forums be for older members. In the Tower, there are already forums based on gender, at least according to the who can see what post in the FAQ. In the future, it would not be surprising to have a forum limited to members aged 40+ so that they can have a private space away from younger members. As any community grows, so does the forum to support the group.

 

[Alexstrasz Ruskein]

since the age requirement is changing, I thought it might be a good place to talk about the language used to talk about the community, specifically the use of the term/phrase "family friendly." Instead of being inclusionary, "family-friendly" is often used to promote a very particular, 'traditional' heteronormative, cis-gendered, opposite-sex spouses with children kind of family; i.e., it is exclusionary. Said another way, family-friendly is code for members of the Queer/LGBTQ+ Community need not apply. I'm not saying that the community supports it, as it clearly does not, but that the language used to describe expectations is unintentionally coded.

I understand the desire to have some shorthand for no swearing, etc., but there are ways of stating that requirement that don't have a history of exclusion. In fact, it could be easier to explicitly state what kind of language is and isn't allowed.

Instead of American movie ratings, perhaps using video game ratings would be easier. Or simply a two-letter system such as "C" and "M" where "C" is for community, as in all members' posts have to be respectful of certain limits like no swearing. And "M," where mature content is allowed, and anyone using that forum/thread implicitly agrees to that condition by entering said thread/forum.

This is a great point.

I'm tired and don't have suggestions, but I do like the idea of finding a more internationally understood ratings-terminology. I know I mentioned American movie ratings in my post, but it was to compare/respond to a previous comment. I'm not particularly attached to it.

 

[Morgana Arakos]

+1 to this point

 

[Arella Mathara]

Yeah, uhm, this whole discussion is very confusing to some of us, and a very foreign concept, just saying

Whatever is decided on regarding ratings and language and whatever, please try to keep it easy to understand. I for one have almost stopped posting in the general areas and the Tower discord (considering my activity level I don't post often). This is highly due to me being sick of censoring myself and second guessing if a joke or a topic is okay or not. I would definitely feel more included and welcome if I could talk more freely, and I'm probably not the only one 🤷‍♀️

So yeah, please make it easy to understand for everyone at the very least. Preferably loosen up the rules a bit

And yay for the age requirement change. It's a good call.

 

[Nadezhda al'Lanahrin]

Yeah, uhm, this whole discussion is very confusing to some of us, and a very foreign concept, just saying

Whatever is decided on regarding ratings and language and whatever, please try to keep it easy to understand. I for one have almost stopped posting in the general areas and the Tower discord (considering my activity level I don't post often). This is highly due to me being sick of censoring myself and second guessing if a joke or a topic is okay or not. I would definitely feel more included and welcome if I could talk more freely, and I'm probably not the only one 🤷‍♀️

So yeah, please make it easy to understand for everyone at the very least. Preferably loosen up the rules a bit

And yay for the age requirement change. It's a good call.

+1

 

[Polegnyn Nemeara]

I feel like this question is based in the assumption that the age requirement change was arbitrary. However, it wasn't arbitrary, to my knowledge: It very specifically restricted site membership to the age of legal adulthood in the United States, where the group is incorporated, or required parental consent for someone under that age to join the site. That's a specific remedy to a specific set of issues (e.g., liability, exposure of minors to certain content). So I'm not sure why it would seem likely that it would form the basis to any arbitrary change.

My question is based on that our average membership age is around 34. As the average age grows, so too does the difference between it and 18yo. If the age requirement to join is changed to 18 then it can be changed to any age deemed appropriate to make the entire community comfortable.

 

[Morgana Arakos]

People have no reason to be uncomfortable talking to people above the age of 18 because they are not children, though. That's the difference.

 

[Ananke Ruadh]

People have no reason to be uncomfortable talking to people above the age of 18 because they are not children, though. That's the difference.

It is not an unreasonable concern, given the recent social push about "Adult Minors" due to rather faulty science ("Your brain doesn't stop developing until you're 25, so even if you're 18 you're a Minor until you're 25") along with people citing "age of majority" which in some places isn't until 21 but is not unlikely to be over the age of 18; Canada (19 in certain territories), Japan (20), Korea (19), New Zealand (20), and the United States (19 in Alabama, Nebraska, Puerto Rico and 21 in Mississippi).

Blame social conservatism in the States, blame patriarchal religions, blame "Puriteens," blame differing laws or whatever you wish. But there is a legal frame of reference for the concern.

And there are more people pushing than you might think:

“When are you really an adult?”

It is a question that has possessed both poets and lawmakers.

But there is not much clarity in state laws. In Alaska, teenagers as young as 14 can get married with a court order. Only a handful of states allow drinking under 21 and that is under strict circumstances, like when a parent or legal guardian is present.

Eighteen-year-old adults can run for office, go to strip clubs, be sentenced to life in prison, and volunteer to go to war or be drafted, but as of last December, they cannot vape or smoke tobacco products.

And since 1984, when states began raising the legal age of drinking to 21 from 18 in exchange for federal highway funds — in some cases barely a decade after lowering it — they have not been able to buy a beer at a bar in most of the United States, a restriction that has infuriated college students ever since.

“If 18-year-olds are burdened with the responsibility of adulthood, they should be afforded some of its privileges,” said Charlotte Lawson, a 21-year-old fourth-year student at the University of Virginia who wrote an opinion piece in the campus paper in 2018 calling for the drinking age to be lowered from 21.

“It’s interesting these are people who work full-time jobs, pay their own rent, pay taxes and are eligible to vote,” she said. “Yet none of this constitutes adequate proof that a person is responsible enough to drink.”

===

The scientific consensus that most brains do not fully develop until age 25 has led to a host of reforms in the criminal justice system and reexaminations about how society should punish young adults. But it has also fed the confusion over what young adults should be allowed to do when scientists know that they use less restraint and discipline than older people, said Warren Binford, a law professor at Willamette University and founder of the school’s Child and Family Advocacy Clinic.
“We’re constantly trying to balance the rights to protection and the rights to participation,” said Ms. Binford. “We are a society that loves its liberty, but we’re also a society that recognizes that children are unique and special and deserving of protection.”

-When Do You Become An Adult, NYT,
By Nicole Daniels
Feb. 6, 2020

It would not surprise me at all if, somewhere down the road, someone brought up how much drinking tends to go on at Anni parties and the Spring Fling and claimed that no 18 year old should be exposed to it given the current political climate here in the States and the pushback we're seeing with regards to normal adult behavior and autonomy. ...I would however, be quite disappointed at the caving to outside pressures.

 

[Satara al'Caelahn]

My question is based on that our average membership age is around 34. As the average age grows, so too does the difference between it and 18yo. If the age requirement to join is changed to 18 then it can be changed to any age deemed appropriate to make the entire community comfortable.

If you're going based on the idea that the required age to join the site is directly related to the average age of the existing membership, that absolutely holds true. I get what you're saying.

However, somewhere in the history of our species, we picked 18 as the magical age when a child becomes an adult in the eyes of the law. And because that's the legal age of adulthood, it also becomes culturally acceptable to see anyone who is 18 and older as an adult, even if they are just barely shy of still being a child. There's such a huge cultural and legal shift between the ages of 17 and 18 (for most countries, I know that not every place is the same.)

The rift between 20 and 21 is much smaller, and is fairly localized to the United States in regards to drinking. Most other countries have a lower age limit for the consumption of alcohol.

It would not surprise me at all if, somewhere down the road, someone brought up how much drinking tends to go on at Anni parties and the Spring Fling and claimed that no 18 year old should be exposed to it given the current political climate here in the States and the pushback we're seeing with regards to normal adult behavior and autonomy. ...I would however, be quite disappointed at the caving to outside pressures.

I was literally typing this post when you posted, and hit where I was aiming. It's not an unfounded concern, at least for in-person events.

However, for membership on the site itself, I don't see the masses trying to raise the minimum age to 21 because it's not like we're going to be drinking in a virtual setting.

 

[Ananke Ruadh]

I was literally typing this post when you posted, and hit where I was aiming. It's not an unfounded concern, at least for in-person events.

However, for membership on the site itself, I don't see the masses trying to raise the minimum age to 21 because it's not like we're going to be drinking in a virtual setting.

This is true! And for membership of the site, it might not be the most accurate; not the word I want but eh; of concerns, but it holds merit. As you say, for in-person events... Despite mixed-ages camps being a thing, TVN as an entity might not be able to deal with the liability concerns at some point, if our legislators get twitchier than they already are. And with the current bent of politics in the US.... well.

Like I said. Not unreasonable.

 

[Jaryd Kosari]

I've checked SA once or twice a week for the last however long, and this thread combined with some chats with my Warders is what got me to log back in and poke around at the Tower again.

I'm glad this change has been made. Our demographic and our community expectations haven't made sense for a long time, and this is a first step toward making this a space that is actually safe, and actually makes sense.

Some personal ruminations y'all can ignore if you like:

Spoiler

I've been moderating a Discord server with over 3,000 members since very early 2018. It's part of a server that is far more contentious , and has a far wider age demographic, than Wheel of Time ever has been or ever will be. It isn't a "discoverable" Discord community, which means people only get in by way of finding or being given a direct link, and our fandom is "dead." Most importantly for this conversation...we're an 18+ community and always have been.

Minors join our community all the damn time. They sit in our foyer, they read our rules, they say "whoops I'm not 18, sorry," and they leave. We get a handful of people each month who come in and say something along the lines of "I just turned 18, I can finally join!" None of them are resentful for having to wait. The community is now six years old and the longest anyone has waited to join it is four years. They were delighted to join on their birthday, and we were delighted to welcome them.

We allow adult conversations, including swear words and sensitive topics. We allow sharing of explicit content in specific areas. Our emoji collection includes artistic renditions of peens. One of our bot triggers pops up the "aliens" guy except he's drawn to look like a character from our show and he's saying "dicks." Despite this, that server is the only fandom space I regularly participate in that I feel comfortable opening in public, because our rules about what goes where are specific, consistent, and thus respected by our membership base.

Modding that server is the easiest fandom "job" I have ever had—and I've been modding or administrating fandom communities and chat servers for twenty five years.

So. If anyone is sitting here biting their fingers wondering whether going 18+ makes us exclusionary, or somehow makes us more prone to trouble, or will lead to a slippery slope of other restrictions, or whatever other anxious thinky-thoughts that might brew around the thought of "adults only" spaces...you don't need to. Relax. There's an entire world of fandom out there for kids to play in, and judging by the membership metrics shared earlier in this thread (which reflect thoughts I shared with the officers when I was an officer myself), they're already choosing to do so. Putting an age limit on our membership relieves our admin team of a lot of legal culpability, frees them up to make community rules that make sense for who we actually are, and frees us up to relax and actually behave like adults. All of those are good things.

 

[Jaryd Kosari]

Oh, further personal ruminations. This one includes discussion of minors, sexual predators, and my specific personal interactions with the FBI re: the above, so proceed with care.

Spoiler

This happened on another site, but the person it happened to is active and present on this one, so I'm keeping it vague. You know who you are, if you clicked on this. Many soft hugs for you, my friend.

I have been the web administrator made aware that my message boards were being used to perpetrate predatory behavior and share CP. The person involved, and who confided in me about this, was a very good friend, and it was extraordinarily difficult to navigate what came after.

Website owners are mandatory reporters, did you know that? I had to report the entire situation to the FBI, or risk being held personally responsible for the adult content hosted on my servers when the predator was caught and his activities investigated. I had to turn over the contents of my entire website to the FBI, subject myself to multiple phone interviews, I had agents in suits come to my house and interview me and go through my shit to ensure that I wasn't trying to cover my own ass, and I lost the trust of my friend, who was hurt and scared and didn't understand (at the time) why I did it.

This is an extreme case. But it does happen. It HAS happened, literally in my personal experience. I don't believe in separating children from adults as a wholesale rule; I think that's incredibly stupid and leads to big issues, especially for the queer community. When it comes to private fandom spaces, however, setting logical limits that prevent such incidents from happening in the first place (or at the darkest worst, erase culpability) is the best possible course of action to take.

 

[Ajailyn Morrivinna]

Nvm not worth the hassle
(And was not in reply to Jaryd's post above mine.. )