Membership Manual Change: Age Requirements Revised

[Tree]

Totally understand that, too. Fix the pervy behavior and remind Joe Gaidin he better keep the conversation public and rated-PG at best. We already have guidelines and consequences in place to handle icky or illegal behavior.

The issue here is that while we can tell Joe Gaidin not to {INSERT WILDLY INAPPROPRIATE ACTION HERE} and we can moderate him for doing {SAME WILDLY INAPPROPRIATE ACTION} on the forums there are a lot of non-public spaces both on and off our Forums and Official Discord. We do not want to put Joe Gaidin in contact with Novice Julie and implementing age requirements for the community is the best way for us to not serve as that conduit.

but there is no real way for us to manage our spaces to ensure they are entirely safe for minors

This is such an important point! We have no absolute way to maintain an environment wherein Joe Gaidin can't find Novice Julie (who again is 16, even if she told us 18) . What we can do it limit that potential in any way possible. If that means barring Novice Julie because we don't know what Joe Gaidin is doing off the forums and Official Discord, yes, I am fine with that.

 

[Toral Delvar]

Don't we also have like one or two at most people under 18? It's not like its something that actually happens, we get minors decide they want to hang out with people largely in their 30s-50s. Different to a couple of decades ago when we did have many people 14-18.

 

[Polegnyn Nemeara]

There has to be some sort of balance here...

 

[Viktara Fen]

If I had to guess, I would also suspect that some aspects of the current political climate in the US, where the group is incorporated/administered, make it especially important to avoid any chance that someone could accuse the group of encouraging improper interactions between minors and adults, no matter how spurious those accusations might be. In an ideal world, we wouldn't have to worry about that, but I rather suspect we do have to keep it in mind.

My understanding, too, is that you have to be 18 to become a Citizen. That would appear to say nothing about being able to just be a guest on the public part of the boards (and if I'm wrong, please do correct me). I've been a member of other groups in the past that maintained that same distinction--in other words, you could hang around and post in the outermost areas of the site/boards/etc. without any kind of age confirmation, but to actually join, you had to demonstrate that you're an adult or that your legal guardian(s) were okay with it. That sort of setup worked well in those cases, so far as I'm aware.

 

[Alyria Ess]

There has to be some sort of balance here...

If you have an idea, throw it out there. I've rolled it around my brain for years and years and haven't come up with a solution.

It's been looked at from all sides, and uniquely the side of many of our "ancient" members who were teens themselves when they first joined however many moons ago.

 

[Rhed al'Tere]

I fully support this update. Thank you.

Another issue to consider when looking at the bigger picture is that we don’t always know what’s happening. There can be inappropriate actions taking place but if the person who’s the target of those actions doesn’t report, administration cannot act. And we KNOW that women tend to report their harassers much less often that it actually happens—that’s WOMEN who are of age not reporting because they thing they won’t be believed (perhaps Creep Gaidin is a well-respected member of the community, or a long-time member held in good regard). If we ask GIRLS under 18 to report those same people? Pffffft. It’s not going to happen. We can say all we want that we’re a safe space for all, but there’s still the fear of stigma when reporting sexual harassment or inappropriate behavior.

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. Better to close that door and reduce the risk.

 

[Elanda Tonil]

I get why we’re doing this but the optics aren’t great, tbh. We’re going the route of banning the potential victim, placing the entire cost on the innocent party. This is functionally equivalent to saying girls aren’t allowed because men might look at them and have impure thoughts. The entirety of the cost here is borne by the potential victim.

Do we need to do something for CYA purposes? I can certainly see that argument. Does this need to be that something? I’m not convinced, though it definitely seems like the easiest solution which has value. But let’s not pretend we’re being morally superior here. We’re letting the potential targets pay the full price for safety. That’s fine if it’s the best option, but it still kinda sucks even if it’s the best option. I eat brussels sprouts when I need to, but it kinda sucks that I need to sometimes.

 

[Polegnyn Nemeara]

I get why we’re doing this but the optics aren’t great, tbh. We’re going the route of banning the potential victim, placing the entire cost on the innocent party. This is functionally equivalent to saying girls aren’t allowed because men might look at them and have impure thoughts. The entirety of the cost here is borne by the potential victim.

+1

 

[Satara al'Caelahn]

Fully support this update, and I'm mildly confused by those who are against it.

I fully support this update. Thank you.

Another issue to consider when looking at the bigger picture is that we don’t always know what’s happening. There can be inappropriate actions taking place but if the person who’s the target of those actions doesn’t report, administration cannot act. And we KNOW that women tend to report their harassers much less often that it actually happens—that’s WOMEN who are of age not reporting because they thing they won’t be believed (perhaps Creep Gaidin is a well-respected member of the community, or a long-time member held in good regard). If we ask GIRLS under 18 to report those same people? Pffffft. It’s not going to happen. We can say all we want that we’re a safe space for all, but there’s still the fear of stigma when reporting sexual harassment or inappropriate behavior.

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. Better to close that door and reduce the risk.

I get why we’re doing this but the optics aren’t great, tbh. We’re going the route of banning the potential victim, placing the entire cost on the innocent party. This is functionally equivalent to saying girls aren’t allowed because men might look at them and have impure thoughts. The entirety of the cost here is borne by the potential victim.

I get what you're saying, Elanda. I don't like victim blaming as much as anyone else. But given what Rhed said, which is 100% true (Rhed quoted for posterity), what's the alternative? If this doesn't work for people, then what does?

Administration and Moderation can't control what someone says or does over PM unless it's reported and it rarely is. These rules would impact very few current members. Out of those current members, most of them (if not all) are the children of existing Tower members who can easily give their consent for them to join. Nobody who's currently a member is getting banned over this change.

Let's also keep in mind that this isn't just about protecting young women from older men. This is about protecting minors. Period. To me, in my mind, the safety of our minors is way more important than hurting someone's feelings by making them wait a couple of years to join.

 

[Ananke Ruadh]

I get why we’re doing this but the optics aren’t great, tbh. We’re going the route of banning the potential victim, placing the entire cost on the innocent party. This is functionally equivalent to saying girls aren’t allowed because men might look at them and have impure thoughts. The entirety of the cost here is borne by the potential victim.

Do we need to do something for CYA purposes? I can certainly see that argument. Does this need to be that something? I’m not convinced, though it definitely seems like the easiest solution which has value. But let’s not pretend we’re being morally superior here. We’re letting the potential targets pay the full price for safety. That’s fine if it’s the best option, but it still kinda sucks even if it’s the best option. I eat brussels sprouts when I need to, but it kinda sucks that I need to sometimes.

+2

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...

Administration and Moderation can't control what someone says or does over PM unless it's reported and it rarely is. These rules would impact very few current members. Out of those current members, most of them (if not all) are the children of existing Tower members who can easily give their consent for them to join. Nobody who's currently a member is getting banned over this change.

Let's also keep in mind that this isn't just about protecting young women from older men. This is about protecting minors. Period. To me, in my mind, the safety of our minors is way more important than hurting someone's feelings by making them wait a couple of years to join.

Thank you. The original framing was incredibly uncomfortable, as it leaves out all the sorts of behavior that our older adult female-identifying members can perpetuate; including similar sexual misconduct.

 

[Rhed al'Tere]

Pardon my implication of there only being male creeps and not including female creeps. I was pulling from my own past experience as well as experience here.

Point still holds.

 

[Polegnyn Nemeara]

“Current members” keeps being referred to, but this also impacts potential future members. Think beyond the present.

To be clear, the last thing I want is someone harassing another member (minor or otherwise) and understand this is not a perfect world where everyone will behave themselves. But will also continue thinking on another solution that doesn’t impact membership to such a severe degree regardless.

 

[Tree]

I would just like to point backward in the thread a minute. We want to lessen our liabilities, yes. However, this was not the only reason there was, or that was given, for this change. I am glad the we're not providing a space for Creep Gaidin or Sus Sedai, etc... but there are additional reasons we made this proactive change.

We do want to expand the services and activities that we provide our membership and I do not feel qualified to say what is and isn't appropriate for who and what audience. Be it watching movies with adult topics together or playing D&D with adult themes I do not believe that we have the capacity to offer those services and activities in an environment that is appropriate for all ages. I cannot tel you what is appropriate for a 15-year old, and beyond that it varies by 15-year and their family. None of us can make those decisions, especially not for other people's children.

To this end, this change will allow us to offer and extend services and activities that our community has expressed interest in and which match the demographic realities of our community. Including amongst new members, the demographics at a Con may skew in one direction or another but there is not a direct parity between the demographics at JCon (or even ComicCon) to our community- the community that we seek to serve.

 

[Satara al'Caelahn]

“Current members” keeps being referred to, but this also impacts potential future members. Think beyond the present.

For my part, at least, there's a big difference between asking a current member to leave because of their age (which the site isn't doing) and telling a potential new member that they're too young and have to wait a couple of years before they're allowed to join. "Current members" are being grandfathered in so we're going to have minors on the site for years yet, anyway.

Vaguely (not directed at anyone in particular), I also wanted to add that for me, it's a bit like choosing to go see a rated R movie. You don't blame the viewer for being underage. You simply recognize that the content of the movie might not be appropriate for a minor. I know that not accepting members under the age of 18 can seem limiting, but it ensures that all of our members are of an age where they can consent for themselves if they want to see certain content and hopefully will be mature enough to make those choices for themselves.

 

[Toral Delvar]

If we had members under 18, I could accept it is limiting future membership, but we really have just one or two, the impact on potential membership would seem to be negligible

 

[Polegnyn Nemeara]

We do want to expand the services and activities that we provide our membership and I do not feel qualified to say what is and isn't appropriate for who and what audience. Be it watching movies with adult topics together or playing D&D with adult themes I do not believe that we have the capacity to offer those services and activities in an environment that is appropriate for all ages. I cannot tel you what is appropriate for a 15-year old, and beyond that it varies by 15-year and their family. None of us can make those decisions, especially not for other people's children.

To this end, this change will allow us to offer and extend services and activities that our community has expressed interest in and which match the demographic realities of our community. Including amongst new members, the demographics at a Con may skew in one direction or another but there is not a direct parity between the demographics at JCon (or even ComicCon) to our community- the community that we seek to serve.

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.

I’m very well aware about lack of resources so priorities have to be chosen or people trained so they can step up. Not everyone has the natural skillset to throw a birthday party much less a raging kegger. But automatically choose an older demographic who will more than likely “move away” naturally is, imho, completely backwards in trying to build a community.

 

[Seryse ni Cousland]

So, throwing in my two cents as an anecdote and not the rule. I have personal, real experience with being taken advantage of by an adult predator as a minor on a Wheel of Time website. And then I put him in federal prison for 60 years. I'm pretty evenly split on the issue, as I would love to see our community grow and thrive. But I also can see the point where reporting because you think you're wildly in love with your abuser is... Not gonna happen. So. There's that. It's not just an issue of being afraid to report, it's an issue of actively protecting predators from consequences of their actions.

I think it's important to look at the information we have available to us. Most of our new members trickling in from exposure to the show have been adults. Young adults, sure, but adults nonetheless. The age of consent wildly differs across the globe. In my state, it's 16. I personally think that we can invite people who are of the age of consent in their location. But idk if that winds up making much of a difference in the long run. I think that it's also possible to extend an invitation to join to minor's parents should a minor like to join. When I joined a wheel of time community, the mistress of novices at the time sent along an email to my mom with her personal contact information. Like, her private cell number. If a teenager is looking to hide their online activity, they probs shouldn't be here. Obviously there are special cases... But I understand that we as a community need guidelines that everyone can follow, even if they don't necessarily agree.

 

[Polegnyn Nemeara]

I am really sorry this happened to you (and everyone else that has posted negative experiences), @Seryse ni Cousland No one should have to go through that.

Sounds like a topic the SoA should address. @Faeril Munlear

I think that it's also possible to extend an invitation to join to minor's parents should a minor like to join. When I joined a wheel of time community, the mistress of novices at the time sent along an email to my mom with her personal contact information. Like, her private cell number.

Looooove this idea. Thank you for sharing To be clear, I also understand the hesitation of a new member sharing their address with an unfamiliar community and those special circumstances where parental involvement could potentially bring about negative consequences. It's something to consider at least, if it hasn't been already.

 

[Ty al'Djinn]

I love this update.

While I did wonder how it might impact growth, the overlap between underage folks, wheel of time fans, and people who are likely to be on a forum (a wildly out of date medium on today’s internet) has to be vanishingly small. Perfectly happy to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good, here.

 

[Zashara Sho'am]

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. Also we were idiots (we were still idiots at 18 and 19, but we were also legal adults who didn't need permission from parents to see randos from the internet). There's this desire to be "cool" at that age and follow whichever grown up we thought was cool and that led to some .... questionable ... decisions that ended with a bunch of us doing penance by writing library articles and whatnot. I'm also 95% sure that someone lied about their age and it was a Very Big Deal. We were probably a big chunk of the BS that Eleyan had to deal with.

I did find other people here who became friends back then but times change and we learn more about appropriate behavior. 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.

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.