• Kane@femboys.biz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Yeah, it seems a little odd to do a full ban for anyone under 18. Do they feel that all communities on there are not appropriate for minors?

    • elfin8er@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Afaik, there are laws and regulations that make it more difficult to collect personal information about minors including their email address. I imagine the admins understandably just don’t want to deal with that.

      • Kane@femboys.biz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        35 minutes ago

        That’s a fair point that I have not considered. It’s much easier to claim ignorance as an instance admin, if said user did not spill they were underage. It’s indeed far more likely that they do not mind, but if the evidence is clear as day, they can not ignore it anymore either.

  • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    You admitted to violating ToS, soooo…. Yeah. YDI.

    Moving forward, know that your choices are:

    1. Be dishonest with your age
    2. Don’t tell anyone abut your age
    3. Read the rules of the instance prior to using it.
      • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        He didn’t agree to the ToS

        He didn’t even bother to read it. Which is why he ended up getting banned. You don’t get to waive out of a speeding ticket just because you didn’t bother to read the speed limit signs.

        If I didn’t bother to read the rules of an instance, and then got my shit removed because I violated those rules, I’d just accept that I made an error and walk away.

        So…

        I stand by my YDI.

        • Demigodrick@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 hours ago

          A terms of service is a legal agreement between a user and the host. The user in this case did not access lemmy.world and is not their user, so cannot be bound by the ToS. The same way you cannot be forced into an optional legal agreement that you haven’t read or seen.

          There is no question that the lemmy.world admins can ban someone from their site if they wish to, but claiming its for a violation of ToS is completely incorrect. The lemmy.world admin in this case decided to arbitrarily ban someone because they say they’re under 18, even though there is no legal consideration for lemmy.world here.

          Can they do this? Yes. It’s their site. But they are incorrect to refer to their ToS for this ban, because the user is not bound by this.

          The action taken was outside of any stated lemmy.world policy on moderation.

          • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            5 hours ago

            Their terms of service state that you must be of a certain age to use their instance. It’s not a sign-able agreement. It’s the terms of their service. It’s their rules. As in… the TERMS of their service. Using their instance is the agreement.

            Besides… if they want- they can just ban you for whatever reason they choose. So, whether your nitpicking of the definition of Terms of Service is correct or not, the point remains.

            I’ll tell you what though, if you think you have a case… go ahead and offer to represent them in a lawsuit. See how far that flies. But I’m going to guess that there is no legal precedent that states they have a right to post whatever they want wherever they want- regardless of the Terms of Service.

            • sag@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Besides… if they want- they can just ban you for whatever reason they choose. So, whether your nitpicking of the definition of Terms of Service is correct or not, the point remains.

              That’s just PTB

              I am not using their service. I used copy of their community. Holy Shit, lots of user don’t know how TOS works.

              • Demigodrick@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                It’s totally wild how many people who don’t understand it are trying to weigh in with their incorrect opinion.

                I know it’s a very specific point this centres around, being that the ToS doesn’t apply to you, but it needs debate and discussion so mistakes like this don’t happen in the future.

            • Demigodrick@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              It absolutely is a signable agreement, you agreed to it when you signed up to lemmy.world 🤦‍♂️ you even have to specifically type that you agree these days, I believe.

              And yes, by using the website you agree to it - except (as i and others have to keep pointing out) the user did not use lemmy.worlds website at any point. That isn’t how federation works. To suggest it does is just ignorance of the topic.

              Yes, we agree that they can ban them for any reason they choose, that’s not up for debate, but they cannot apply a clause from their terms of service and specifically cite their terms of service, because it doesn’t apply to the remote user.

              The largest lemmy instance should be held to account for their actions (as should any lemmy instance). The admin didn’t even have to state a reason for the ban, but by saying its the ToS they’ve invalidated their action. It’s not rocket science if you take two minutes to understand how federation and ToS works.

              • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 hours ago

                Check their comment history. They post in .world VERY often.

                This isn’t up for debate. They violated the rules. They may have a different home instance, but they post in .world. That- according to the rules, violates the ToS of .world.

                I don’t get how this isn’t getting through to you, but I honestly don’t care to keep explaining it.

                Dude was banned. You’re gong to have to learn how to be okay with that.

                • Demigodrick@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 hours ago

                  No, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how federation works.

                  The user is on lemm.ee. When they make a post, they’re posting to a local copy of the community, and never directly onto the server. Thats not how federation works and so your points are all totally invalid.

                  At no point does the user ever make contact themselves with that external server. They never physically touch lemmy.world in their actions, everything they do is on lemm.ee, and so lemm.ee’s Terms of Service is the one that applies to the user.

                  As has already been hashed out multiple times, Lemmy.world’s ToS is not relevant here and does not apply to an external user.

                  This is totally up for debate, and you don’t understand it. That’s fine, learn from people who do know and take it with some humility.

                  Oh and if you still don’t get why its important and how wrong you are - if you were right, then every single post you make is federated to thousands of different fedi servers. Suddenly, you would be legally in contract with all those thousands of servers and their ToS. Imagine if I put in mine that users have to pay a small sum of currency for every post that they make on my server. In your incorrect definition, you would be liable for that just like lemmy.world have applied their ToS against someone who isn’t one of their users.

                  What lemmy.world should do is update their moderation policies/code of conduct/whatever to specifically say that they will ban you if they suspect you are under 18. Its such an easy fix. This never had to be so wrong in the first place.

          • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            And if you check their comment history, you’ll see that they post in .world quite frequently.

            • irelephant [he/him]🍭@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              The ToS specifically says:

              By using the website, you represent that you are at least 18

              Since the post just federated to a lemmy world comm, they didn’t access the website at all.

              • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                3 hours ago

                Holy shit how do you not understand this?

                Tell me that if you owned and operated an instance that doesn’t allow NSFW content, that you’d do nothing at all if I posted porn to it from an account that was hosted on a different instance…

                Or would I have to follow the rules of your instance regardless of what my home instance is?

  • jadedwench [they/them]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    That is a kind of shitty response from World and seems a little condescending to me, but tone is difficult. You are welcome here and I would rather you stay and interact with the rest of us than leave the fediverse. Your voice matters and I didn’t have the same outlets when I was your age.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Right… What are we trying to protect the kid here from…

      If he knows how to use fedi prolly already using Linux too… Anyone with Linux skills will figure a way around anything online tbh

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        22 hours ago

        If he knows how to use [fediverse sites][, he is] prolly already using Linux too… Anyone with Linux skills will figure a way around anything online [to be honest.]

        Yes, the same as if I lock a door someone breaking the rules will just climb in a window, and that should somehow be okay but isn’t.

      • vxx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        I think it’s less about protecting the kid but about liability. You can just enter under 18, but they have to do something when you boast about it. It’s not as if check your ID.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    10 hours ago

    So they banned an under age user from only their instance for the exact amount of time until they become old enough to be a legitimate user on their instance?

    Man I want Reddit mod drama back. Where’s I was banned for sleeping with my step mod?!?

  • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 day ago

    PTB. This is unreasonable. Also trying to prevent teenagers from accessing the internet is just going to lead to all teenagers just lying about their age. It’s not going to stop it. It’s just going to mean they can’t discuss their actual opinions and issues honestly. It would also reinforce the need to lie to be part of culture, which is just not healthy.

    • bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Teenagers lying about their age on the internet is as old as teenagers on the internet.

      Keeping the age barriers in place is good anyway. It communicates to younger people clearly that the content is not considered suitable for them. It gives them a moment to think and reconsider.

      Participating in online culture might be generally not healthy for adults as well.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          25
          ·
          1 day ago

          What’s most important is that you got to feel smug.

          What’s most important is not having every fucking instance other than .world hanging from a legal thread. Isn’t your instance based in the E fucking U? That’s not exactly the wild fucking west as far as legal requirements for hosts go.

          Believe it or not, I don’t want any of this shit going down. I’m not fucking 20, I’m not full of vim and vigor. I don’t get a fucking thrill out of fighting with people online anymore. I question why I stay in these communities when everyone seems content to play chicken on the railroad tracks.

          • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            29
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            I don’t get a fucking thrill out of fighting with people online anymore.

            I find this hard to believe

            • Blazingtransfem98
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              That’s literally the only reason he does it, otherwise he would’ve stopped a long time ago.

              • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                after two decades of unfettered internet access, I still love picking fights.

                maybe I’m just built different

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              13 hours ago

              I find this hard to believe

              I find it tedious and miserable. I engage for the same reason I can’t leave trash on the floor - the inaction irritates me more than the tedious action. If I find trash on the floor constantly in a public area, I’m more likely to leave than become a super-cleaner.

          • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Man, that constant “I’m the only adult in the room” vibe you try to have is getting obnoxious old.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              26
              ·
              1 day ago

              Man, that constant “I’m the only adult in the room” vibe you try to have is getting obnoxious old.

              Yeah, I fucking agree. It’s getting real old being the only adult in the room. I didn’t realize the admins of most Lemmy instances were just winging it, thinking “Well, when it comes crashing down, it comes crashing down 😊”

              Utter zero-foresight techbro shite. Jesus Christ.

              • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                27
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                Sadly You’re not the real adult in the room. You’re just a smuglord who’s way too high on the smell of their own farts.

                • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  22
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Sadly You’re not the real adult in the room. You’re just a smuglord who’s way too high on the smell of their own farts.

                  Legit, I thought you took your instance more seriously than this. This is basic covering-your-ass shit.

  • Jack Hughman@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    I think an 18+ rule for an instance that allows porn or federates with porn instances is reasonable. And when you interact with another instance’s communities, you are beholden to their rules. And the admin who did it said they’re talking about changing the rule. So it’s not like they’re just trying to be dicks.

    So… I’m going to go with admins did what they had to, sag learned a tiny lesson about not giving people more information than they needed. I don’t want to say YDI, though.

  • cm0002@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Eh, kinda half and half. Kids these days seem to forget rule #1 of the internet: if you’re under 18 never admit it anywhere, anytime, for any reason.

    Hell, don’t even admit you made your account when you were underage, but aren’t now. I’ve seen regular forums and MMORPGs ban people who admitted they were underage at the time they made the account, but not anymore

    • AttacktoWin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      I feel like the rules of the internet should be taught again, or at least particularly stuff like “don’t feed the trolls”. All of these engagement based algorithms are too focused on pushing bait content.

  • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    ptb

    but…

    I think it’s great that we can expect actual rules and enforcement from instance admins, and have a chance to suss out the edges of these rules in open fora.

  • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    PTB, this seems really like they’re overstepping their bounds, @Demigodrick@lemmy.zip has clarified the matter.

    Unfortunately this isn’t the first time Lemmy.world has done something like this using “legal” as an excuse, and probably won’t be the last time. They’re too big so they’ll never get defederated or penalized by any server wishing to stay even remotely relevant so nothing is likely to change.

  • fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Damn, i liked sag :(

    I think i’m going with a soft PTB from my pov. Tbf dbzer0 is pretty lax on rules, especially towards people outside the instance. I don’t think it’s within my place or anyone else’s to ban someone from such a huge part of the fediverse.

    But this highlights the need to decentralize from .world, the fact that a single instance ban can take away such a huge part of the fediverse from a user feels ridiculous.

    I get why they did it, but it feels unfair.

    • Nora@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I willingly blocked .world that place is a toxic cesspool. It also felt too much like reddit.

      • Dr. Taco@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah, this sort of stuff strikes me as bad for the user affected and for .world, but good for lemmy overall. An active, competent user is being forced to post to non-LW communities exclusively.

        • fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Damn RIP then if I got banned from .world after this post I am leaving Lemmy.

          I hope he doesn’t.

          • Dr. Taco@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Agreed. But even if he does, this sort of stuff contributes to a reputation and could lead future users to choose to post to communities on better instances. That’s the part I think would be good for lemmy overall.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think i’m going with PTB from my pov. Tbf dbzer0 is pretty lax on rules, especially towards people outside the instance. I don’t think it’s within my place or anyone else’s to ban someone from such a huge part of the fediverse.

      Then admins have no place banning people?

      • fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah, that probably wasn’t a good point.

        I feel my point on

        But this highlights the need to decentralize from .world, the fact that a single instance ban can take away such a huge part of the fediverse from a user feels ridiculous.

        Was probably a better one.

        .World is a good instance, but they are too big. Being banned from just any other instance? You can deal with. But being banned off of .world effectively takes away most lemmy content away from you.

        Damn RIP then if I got banned from .world after this post I am leaving Lemmy.

        Ultimately i understand why they did it, but sag was a great poster.

    • sag@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 day ago

      What if they have shitty parents and need to go online to vent?

      Fortunately I have good and supportive parents.

    • Blazingtransfem98
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      What if they have shitty parents and need to go online to vent?

      That’s the whole point, they want to keep children away from support networks to enforce the idea of parents owning their children. People are going to argue otherwise but as a trans person myself I’ve seen this and you’re not fooling anyone with your lame excuses about protecting kids. People especially those who are vulnerable need support networks, do you know how many trans kids kill themselves because they can’t get the support they need and live with abusive and controlling parents. Don’t tell me it’s to protect kids, I’m not stupid enough to buy that lie and you’re not stupid enough to think I’d buy it.

          • Blazingtransfem98
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            22 hours ago

            It’s weird that you consider actions reminiscent of ownership and control, like trying to keep children away from support groups, or preventing a trans kid from expressing themselves in a way that aligns with their gender identity, responsibility or mentorship. You sound so much like a right wing troll right now, and it’s not funny or amusing.

            What, are you going to say that children don’t understand their gender? That they’re confused? That all parents care for their kids and should be the only influence in their lives? It’s certainly sounds like that’s where you’re going right now.

        • Blaze (he/him) @lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          24 hours ago

          Lemm.ee allows 16+ users. They signed up on lemm.ee

          If sag were to get an alt on let’s say Blahaj (not sure they allow underage users, it’s just an example), the LW admins would still ban the new account.

          • scholar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            20 hours ago

            So the account on Blahaj would be able to see and interact with any community not hosted on World, World gets to stay compliant with whatever laws it needs to abide by, everybody’s happy and there’s jam for tea.

              • scholar@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                20 hours ago

                That’s an issue having a more evenly distributed userbase would solve, assuming that multiple, smaller instances wouldn’t also feel bound by similar laws. You can’t eat your cake and still have it.

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        22 hours ago

        That’s the whole point[:] they want to keep children away from support networks to enforce the idea of parents owning their children.

        I wish I had your mind-reading ability. Without that omniscient edge this looks like the weirdest bit of teen O.D.D today.

        • Blazingtransfem98
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Am I supposed to feel insulted? I don’t care what some right wing troll thinks of me. Whether you like it or not, right wing politicians push for these tactics to take support networks away from vulnerable people who they believe to have ownership of.

      • sag@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Most of the user on .world if they can’t even see my post what is point of posting :(

        • throwaway@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          18 hours ago

          There is still lots of people on other instances - and this could push people off .world.

        • yawn@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 day ago

          You can always just make a fresh account (and don’t tell anybody)

        • sunaurus@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          I’m afraid .world users will also miss out on your mod actions in all of your communities, which is a particularly unfortunate side-effect.

          I don’t think it’s the end of the world (:P), though - .world is a big instance, but there are still tons of users on other instances. I mean, even in your communities, I don’t think .world is not making up the majority of activity.

          • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            19 hours ago

            That’s a really problematic choice in the software. Mod actions should not be excluded/ignored even when a remote user is site banned, that can create dangerous situations for your server by allowing all mod actions to federate but not to your server. It just seems like a problem waiting to happen.

        • Blaze (he/him) @lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          The other person suggested an alt without telling anyone, Ssems like the best outcome, really. That way LW can keep a blind eye to the thing, and your posts on your alts wouldn’t be banned from LW

      • sunaurus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m not sure why .world has the 18 age requirement - AFAIK GDPR only requires 16+ if you don’t specifically ask for parental consent. Of course, there is the matter of pornography etc, but for example Reddit allows 13+ users, and all they do for pornography is show an NSFW warning, which Lemmy also has (although this is a good point - maybe the NSFW toggle should be improved to explicitly ask users to confirm their age on Lemmy as well, similarly to how it works on Reddit).

        But at the end of the day, each instance is free to create whatever rules and processes they want, and to ban people according to those rules. I would say that .world admins are probably just trying to do their best in enforcing their rules, and unfortunately that means that most likely you’ll be cut off from .world for the next 5 months 🫤

  • comfy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Aw, they actually did the ban. That’s unfortunate.

    On one hand, yes, legal liability and all that, but on the other hand half the site is copyright violations. The law only matters sometimes. I say this as someone who has hosted web communities myself, there’s no reason to be banning for something like age on these instances, especially when we’re talking 16 and not 12. It’s unenforceable and trivial enough that there’s no legal pressure to do so.

    • CarbonBasedNPU@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      I just think they should make a new account and not say that they are underage. I don’t so much have a problem with people being underage online but saying that you are is putting an unnecessary target on your back.

  • Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    2 days ago

    Hey, I’m the one that decided to ban this user. I understand the frustration, but it is very much in the TOS of lemmy.world and has been for a long time.

    We are having an internal discussion to see if there’s room to lower the age to 16 and if we can make exceptions for federated users.

    I hope you see that this really isn’t meant as a powertrip, and we are just trying to protect the Lemmy.world site.

    Sorry if I do not respond to comments quickly, it’s late in my timezone.

    • sag@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Any update on this?

      If LW is banning me for real then ban my all alt.

      @sag@ani.social

      @sag@lemy.lol

    • arudesalad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      (Opinion bit)

      There should definitely be an exception for federated users. @sag@lemm.ee did not sign up to lemmy.world and therefore did not agree to the ToS.

      (I am not a lawyer, anyone else can correct the stuff I say below)

      Since lw isn’t storing sag’s data (apart from public posts and comments) there shouldn’t be any concerns with child data protection. lemm.ee would be serving them content that under 18s shouldn’t view, not lw (unless they are hosting it, which I don’t think you do?). I may be missing something (again, not a lawyer) but what is the point of this other than being (in my opinion, a bit too) careful with the law?

    • Blaze (he/him) @lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Hello,

      Thank you for chiming in. Exceptions for federated users would be nice, especially for someone turning 18 in a few months.

      • Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yea, I agree, and I would personally be for that. But I am not well versed in the law, and don’t have any stake in the legal side of it all except for me liking lemmy.world, so it’s not my decision.

        I really hope people understand where we as admins are coming from, we really take no enjoyment out of banning anyone (except for spammers).

        • Blazingtransfem98
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          I really hope people understand where we as admins are coming from, we really take no enjoyment out of banning anyone (except for spammers).

          That’s one of the most transparent lies I’ve heard. Power corrupts, and I’ve seen plenty of lemmy.world admins who certainly do enjoy it, and who do it to people to prove a point or as a knee jerk reaction to disagreement. You can call it whatever you want to call, you can deny this fact but it does happen and I’ve seen it myself, and I’d prefer you don’t try to feed me lies I’m smart enough to see right through.

          • Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            I understand that my comment was ambiguous, I tried to say that the current admins, in my experience, don’t enjoy banning people.

              • Blazingtransfem98
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 day ago

                Yeah that doesn’t at all, it definitely does come across as enjoying it and makes his statements less believable.

              • Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                1 day ago

                That wasn’t meant to sound mean, just something that popped up in my head because it was about a birthday.

            • Blazingtransfem98
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 day ago

              I don’t know if that’s entirely true for all or even most of the current ones, it certainly isn’t for past lemmy.world admins, who may or may not still be on the team.