Will there be an official response about Party Finder advertising?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

snip.

---

With it not breaking the ToS is really the point as people suggesting if these were push to shout chat, it's more visible therefore more people report them, but they're not going to go after anybody if it turns out they've not broken the ToS and those ads that minors might see not only stay up, but are more visible to them. With regards to the adult website comparison, the law may not necessarily see it that way as both parties would be engaging in sexual activity, whether it's erotic writing or cyber sex, if it involves a minor then it's the adult that gets into trouble. Somewhere like here in the UK that could potentially ruin your life because you'd be tried as a sex offender which means you're on a sex offenders list and that restricts you in so many ways. And it doesn't matter if you thought it was an adult, some laws on this can be pretty brutal. So I view it as a risk, sure there's things people can do to mitigate that risk and police their communities to make it a slim chance of happening to them.

From a moderation perspective, I don't see any of these suggestions (including my own) to really be any real solution...including the scorched earth one. All scorched earth does is create problems for people who're completely innocent of wrong doing and in effect punish them for another's actions whilst just pushing these communities underground and in the shadows. It means people end up doing this in secret, which sounds like it'd keep underaged people safe, because there's less in the way of advertisement for minors to see. But there's also less in the way of people co-operating with the game's moderation and a disincentive to report suspicious behaviour from people within those communities because hey, they don't want to get banned. And the visibility for GM's goes waaaay down.

And this is where I draw back to a previous point. YoshiP said they have legal support in most countries for investigating these. I expect their strategy is based on what data they have and what legal advice they have. I strongly suspect they already have their best strategy for dealing with these. YoshiP's advice was to report them and they can investigate. If people keep doing that when they see things like brothels being publically advertised then the best thing you can do is report them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

With it not breaking the ToS is really the point as people suggesting if these were push to shout chat, it's more visible therefore more people report them, but they're not going to go after anybody if it turns out they've not broken the ToS and those ads that minors might see not only stay up, but are more visible to them.

---

I dont think it's as visible as that? Typically Ive seen them sit in the misc or private sections of PF. Not always, but I think theres a difference (albeit subtle) between actively shouting it and passively putting up a sign people might see. It is also worth noting that we are discussing the lounges in the assumption of cybering, but that doesnt necessarily have to be the case despite being 18+. Simple adult themes would qualify, or the overt use and suggestion of restricted substances like alcohol or drugs. This is a bit of an ambiguity that would be hard to moderate as it were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

With regards to the adult website comparison, the law may not necessarily see it that way as both parties would be engaging in sexual activity, whether it's erotic writing or cyber sex, if it involves a minor then it's the adult that gets into trouble. Somewhere like here in the UK that could potentially ruin your life because you'd be tried as a sex offender which means you're on a sex offenders list and that restricts you in so many ways. And it doesn't matter if you thought it was an adult, some laws on this can be pretty brutal. So I view it as a risk, sure there's things people can do to mitigate that risk and police their communities to make it a slim chance of happening to them.

---

Yes, but it can also swing the other way. If there was the attempt or success of a minor to pass themselves off as an adult in a manner that itd be hard for the adult in the situation to make the proper determination, it tends to fall on the side of less severe punishments. Im by no means advocating that adults get away with abusing minors, to be clear, but lets not suggest that there arent minors who abuse systems to pass as adults when they shouldnt.

This all being said, what you are suggesting sits more with the individuals than the business entity. In this case, youd have two people interacting. SE only would provide the 'platform' for the interaction, but not the moderation of the interactions. They have reasonable liability if they come across and actual predator/grooming situation and ignore it. But if theyre unaware of a specific situation, it is left more in the hands of the individual participants. I happen that this is actually the reason why you dont see moderation. The more 'hands off' they are, the less liable they become. The more hands on they are, it raises the questions of "Why did you moderate x but not y".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

From a moderation perspective, I don't see any of these suggestions (including my own) to really be any real solution...including the scorched earth one. All scorched earth does is create problems for people who're completely innocent of wrong doing and in effect punish them for another's actions whilst just pushing these communities underground and in the shadows. It means people end up doing this in secret, which sounds like it'd keep underaged people safe, because there's less in the way of advertisement for minors to see. But there's also less in the way of people co-operating with the game's moderation and a disincentive to report suspicious behaviour from people within those communities because hey, they don't want to get banned. And the visibility for GM's goes waaaay down.

---

I dont think it really protects minors from it by being less visible. To be frank, I dont think minors (unless theyre explicitly children aged - so 12 or less) are as stupid as we like to think. If they want to find it, theyll find it. Much like most well enough know what is implied with 18+. By pushing it underground, minors looking for it will find it, and it will be less visible to be moderated. Im always more of hte mindset that keeping things relatively public works best for moderation purposes cause it keeps more eyes on it to catch dubious activities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

And this is where I draw back to a previous point. YoshiP said they have legal support in most countries for investigating these. I expect their strategy is based on what data they have and what legal advice they have. I strongly suspect they already have their best strategy for dealing with these. YoshiP's advice was to report them and they can investigate. If people keep doing that when they see things like brothels being publically advertised then the best thing you can do is report them.

---

As I mentioned above, I think the current moderation is done by intention, and likely cause of that legal support. It is better to be hands off and claim ignorance than to be hands on and be well aware of all the things that occur. If a problem comes out into the open in a very overt way, like shouting in public to go to the 18+ 'RP lounges'. I feel the thinking is "As long as it remains in PF under some of hte sub tabs in a passive way, then it's whatever." Theyll take action when it moves to a much more public and active role, itll be addressed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

I dont think it's as visible as that? Typically Ive seen them sit in the misc or private sections of PF. Not always, but I think theres a difference (albeit subtle) between actively shouting it and passively putting up a sign people might see. It is also worth noting that we are discussing the lounges in the assumption of cybering, but that doesnt necessarily have to be the case despite being 18+. Simple adult themes would qualify, or the overt use and suggestion of restricted substances like alcohol or drugs. This is a bit of an ambiguity that would be hard to moderate as it were.

---

The reason I mention shouts is because the line of reasoning that I've been responding to has been to remove comments entirely from PF and let this all move into shout, which I am suggesting is a worse idea than letting it stay in PF. And agreed with the adult themes, they can anything, people are mainly talking about ERP and Cybering (which are not always the same thing). The wording I used in my example was suggestive enough to communicate it's adult as in lewd but its wording doesn't violate ToS, nor does necessarily the stuff they're doing, so my argument here is that for the argument that we should move it to shout where people will more likely report it and also turn off shout chat if spam is too much doesn't really work if the adverts themselves don't break the ToS and if their activities don't break the ToS because the GM's would let it continue so for the argument being "this is how we'll keep this away from minors" is moot, because it won't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

Yes, but it can also swing the other way. If there was the attempt or success of a minor to pass themselves off as an adult in a manner that itd be hard for the adult in the situation to make the proper determination, it tends to fall on the side of less severe punishments. Im by no means advocating that adults get away with abusing minors, to be clear, but lets not suggest that there arent minors who abuse systems to pass as adults when they shouldnt.

---

That would depend on what the law decides and that can vary country to country. Some law views the adult as the sole responsibility and that they hold the responsibility of verifying the age of the participant. Somebody gave an anecdote of a bouncer who lost their job despite the fact the person found a way to cheat the system and get into a bar underaged. Some places can be harsh. So this is the risk you take, it's also the risk you take working in hospitality, retail and so on, because you can get into trouble serving underaged people there too. It's why here in the UK the policy is if somebody looks under 25, you ID them, even though the legal age for most things is 18.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

This all being said, what you are suggesting sits more with the individuals than the business entity. In this case, youd have two people interacting. SE only would provide the 'platform' for the interaction, but not the moderation of the interactions. They have reasonable liability if they come across and actual predator/grooming situation and ignore it. But if theyre unaware of a specific situation, it is left more in the hands of the individual participants. I happen that this is actually the reason why you dont see moderation. The more 'hands off' they are, the less liable they become. The more hands on they are, it raises the questions of "Why did you moderate x but not y".

---

Yoshi P in an interview I think was clear in that if you do anything illegal then they will take action against your account. With reports they will investigate them. With in game brothels YoshiP explicitly said to report them when people see them. He didn't indicate they'd ban them out right, but put in two emphases, one in that they will investigate it and two that they have legal support to help them in most countries. So I think where they are from a legal standpoint is likely to be safe and that they are doing the appropriate things as far as their platform goes. When it comes to individual responsibility, you break the law then of course you're responsible. Unfortunately, you can have all the best intentions and be certain you're doing the right thing and then find you've broken the law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

I dont think it really protects minors from it by being less visible. To be frank, I dont think minors (unless theyre explicitly children aged - so 12 or less) are as stupid as we like to think. If they want to find it, theyll find it. Much like most well enough know what is implied with 18+. By pushing it underground, minors looking for it will find it, and it will be less visible to be moderated. Im always more of hte mindset that keeping things relatively public works best for moderation purposes cause it keeps more eyes on it to catch dubious activities.

---

I agree it doesn't protect minors by being less visible. If anything I think having it visible enough for GM's to be able to moderate and 'okay' enough for people within those communities to report it without repercussions when they themselves have committed no wrong doing is probably better at protecting minors. Because let's face it, who's most likely going to spot a sexual predator in an MMO? People who engage in sexual activities. From a previous commenter of somebody in one of those communities, they pushed out somebody who was doing inappropriate things with a minor and rejected them outright and made them well known. And the GM's knew about it and the police got involved.

And I agree teenagers, aren't stupid. If anything they are intelligent, naive perhaps and in many cases still oblivious to consequences or apathetic of them. I mean, many people try to see naughty websites before they're old enough and many people still try to buy alcohol underage, many succeed...myself included.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

As I mentioned above, I think the current moderation is done by intention, and likely cause of that legal support. It is better to be hands off and claim ignorance than to be hands on and be well aware of all the things that occur. If a problem comes out into the open in a very overt way, like shouting in public to go to the 18+ 'RP lounges'. I feel the thinking is "As long as it remains in PF under some of hte sub tabs in a passive way, then it's whatever." Theyll take action when it moves to a much more public and active role, itll be addressed.

---

I don't think it's entirely hands off. More if they catch somebody guilty of wrong doing they'll act. At least going by YoshiP's comments about then investigating these cases and encouraging people to report them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

That would depend on what the law decides and that can vary country to country. Some law views the adult as the sole responsibility and that they hold the responsibility of verifying the age of the participant. Somebody gave an anecdote of a bouncer who lost their job despite the fact the person found a way to cheat the system and get into a bar underaged. Some places can be harsh. So this is the risk you take, it's also the risk you take working in hospitality, retail and so on, because you can get into trouble serving underaged people there too. It's why here in the UK the policy is if somebody looks under 25, you ID them, even though the legal age for most things is 18.

---

In California, believe its set to 30 or younger. Been a while since I read the sign on the counters. But I get the policy. But by that same policy, if somebody looks under then 25, presents you with an ID that seems to check out, only for you to find out later it was a fake ID and theyre actually 15, what are you to do as a business in that case. Even as a sales associate, if you follow the instructed training, and it still passes, youre not likely gonna get fired because what are you expected to do in that situation. I can actually speak from experience as working for a corporation as a cashier, Ive seen it happen to fellow employees. Corporate will even go through video tapes of the registers to see what you did and if it checks out with best practices. No one got fined, no one went to jail, no one got fired if everything was above board.

Th bouncer anecdote Im not familiar with. But I wonder what the full circumstances are. Did the bouncer get fired by the establishment, or was he arrested and jailed/imprisoned? Did he have other issues that prompted the termination. I get rules can be strict, no doubt. But there's a difference between going after abusers and people reasonably getting baited into something illegal without their awareness. Even in California they got pretty steep rules for said things, and people dont go to jail or get fined for selling to minors on accident as long as reasonable procedures are followed. If that were the case, almost no one would be in business cause that happens a lot more frequently than people would imagine or like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

Yoshi P in an interview I think was clear in that if you do anything illegal then they will take action against your account. With reports they will investigate them. With in game brothels YoshiP explicitly said to report them when people see them. He didn't indicate they'd ban them out right, but put in two emphases, one in that they will investigate it and two that they have legal support to help them in most countries. So I think where they are from a legal standpoint is likely to be safe and that they are doing the appropriate things as far as their platform goes.

---

I think this is said/done because their legal support is telling them too. What is the best way to cover butt as much as possible? Well, have a report system in place and tell people to report suspicious activity, then investigate. If nothing comes up that they can prove is bad news bears, they just say 'alrighty then'. That being said, they probably dont investigate every nook and cranny in every situation because it creates a cost and liability issue. If their normal procedure was to dig into 2 years of messaging, monitor them for months at a time, check the account information and verify the person's age, and something bad does end up getting through because of happenstance or a spot of negligence, Theyre more liable and on the hook due to how involved their practices are. It would be expected of them because they made it their standard procedure. Not to mention that this level of scrutiny may violate privacy rights in a variety of countries, as well as be resource heavy.

Unfortunately, because the law half the time isnt so much about justice but how to game society, theyre probably doing cursory investigations and if nothing jumps out, they say alright and move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

I agree it doesn't protect minors by being less visible. If anything I think having it visible enough for GM's to be able to moderate and 'okay' enough for people within those communities to report it without repercussions when they themselves have committed no wrong doing is probably better at protecting minors. Because let's face it, who's most likely going to spot a sexual predator in an MMO? People who engage in sexual activities. From a previous commenter of somebody in one of those communities, they pushed out somebody who was doing inappropriate things with a minor and rejected them outright and made them well known. And the GM's knew about it and the police got involved.

---

I wonder why the minor was that environment in the first place if it was known, but that aside, yeah I more or less agree with everything here. Best thing would be to pull people into the loop and have them keep eyes on the content theyre participating in in a productive way. Hand more people flashlights to shine in dark corners then behave like those corners dont exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

And I agree teenagers, aren't stupid. If anything they are intelligent, naive perhaps and in many cases still oblivious to consequences or apathetic of them. I mean, many people try to see naughty websites before they're old enough and many people still try to buy alcohol underage, many succeed...myself included.

---

While this might be an incredibly unpopular opinion, I think that this is just part of being a teenager in general and should be expected. In some capacity or another, theyre gonna get into trouble with a variety of things. Whether its looking adult things, drinking or other drugs like cigarettes, a lot of this crops up cause it's adult, taboo, or a mix of both along with figuring out junk at that age, teens get up into that shenanigans. With that in mind, it's probably better to keep an eye out for bad shenanigans and keep people safe by reporting bad junk than it would be to be an overbearing nanny or outright abolishing stuff because "Think of the innocent children" which stems from a denial that teens are teens and will do teen things at times (to some extent. There's obviously boundaries).

In the end of it... there is no pro's posting this ingame anywhere, only cons, and as it is... it could be or there could be a ring of people with really bad morale, whoms option is to try and lure themself onto minors, that is why it should be prohibited due to it is entirely out of SE's field to be able to monitor, and if they start getting reports in about their game, and also it would be best to prohibit the advertizing in any form due to most of all protecting the people themself from not being fooled by a minor themself either, and end in a very not so fun case.

It is reportable if getting on the bad side of the fence, and GM can see all the chatlogs, if there is a report bound to it.. also there is one more vital thing... both sides can be victims in this as for hate reports as well.

Also this bigger warning label onto something, also the bigger desire for people to over look it, just look on the WWW in what is most searched for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Themarvin

In the end of it... there is no pro's posting this ingame anywhere, only cons, and as it is... it could be or there could be a ring of people with really bad morale, whoms option is to try and lure themself onto minors, that is why it should be prohibited due to it is entirely out of SE's field to be able to monitor, and if they start getting reports in about their game, and also it would be best to prohibit the advertizing in any form due to most of all protecting the people themself from not being fooled by a minor themself either, and end in a very not so fun case.

It is reportable if getting on the bad side of the fence, and GM can see all the chatlogs, if there is a report bound to it.. also there is one more vital thing... both sides can be victims in this as for hate reports as well.

Also this bigger warning label onto something, also the bigger desire for people to over look it, just look on the WWW in what is most searched for.

---

So they prohibit advertising altogether and that's instead of investigating case-by-case for any wrong doing like they do now then does it stop anybody with bad intentions from doing the bad thing? No. Their activity is pushed to using Discord communities, Guilded communities, in game connections, small public spaces they're less likely to get caught. What is the knock-on effect? The GM's lose a lot of visibility. This is why I think they're not being taken down on purpose because they can investigate them for wrong doing and act if they have been found guilty of it. And people then are reporting them. Your hypothetical ring of people would then be visible to the GM's, they could investigate and find "something is going on wrong here" and do something about it. This is what I suspect their approach is. From YoshiP's interview it sounds like that have thought about how they should handle it and they've gotten legal guidance on handling and investigating them, so I trust they're handling it in the most appropriate legal fashion if that's what they've done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

So they prohibit advertising altogether and that's instead of investigating case-by-case for any wrong doing like they do now then does it stop anybody with bad intentions from doing the bad thing? No. Their activity is pushed to using Discord communities, Guilded communities, in game connections, small public spaces they're less likely to get caught. What is the knock-on effect? The GM's lose a lot of visibility. This is why I think they're not being taken down on purpose because they can investigate them for wrong doing and act if they have been found guilty of it. And people then are reporting them. Your hypothetical ring of people would then be visible to the GM's, they could investigate and find "something is going on wrong here" and do something about it. This is what I suspect their approach is. From YoshiP's interview it sounds like that have thought about how they should handle it and they've gotten legal guidance on handling and investigating them, so I trust they're handling it in the most appropriate legal fashion if that's what they've done.

---

I am just trying to point out, that SE, is not going to be on the losing end in this matter and it would be a horrible PR for them, asking them for permitting this niche to be an open option, it is like an invitation to the cyberworld of adult content if they ever permitted it or gave options and special flags to, there is not many options to go by in this matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Themarvin

I am just trying to point out, that SE, is not going to be on the losing end in this matter and it would be a horrible PR for them, asking them for permitting this niche to be an open option, it is like an invitation to the cyberworld of adult content if they ever permitted it or gave options and special flags to, there is not many options to go by in this matter.

---

Fair. They can't really come out saying "this is okay" or "you won't be moderated for engaging in this" but to instead saying putting emphasis on what it unacceptable, which in this case is breaking the law and violating the ToS. It then avoids making affirmative statements or stances. It then brings ambiguity on stuff that has a risk of breaking the law or breaking the ToS and people have to factor in the risk rather than assume "ah okay, it's all fine, they said so".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

Fair. They can't really come out saying "this is okay" or "you won't be moderated for engaging in this" but to instead saying putting emphasis on what it unacceptable, which in this case is breaking the law and violating the ToS. It then avoids making affirmative statements or stances. It then brings ambiguity on stuff that has a risk of breaking the law or breaking the ToS and people have to factor in the risk rather than assume "ah okay, it's all fine, they said so".

---

I’m fine with them turning a blind eye to erp in private, in the same way they turn a blind eye to parsers in private. The instant that touches the public sphere is the instant the thunderbolt should strike, though.

Yes, brothel ads should be removed from pf and shout. Perhaps I was being too generous thinking people would just turn off shout.

Allow brothels no ingame avenue to advertise. They should do all of their communication on discord like the rmt tos dodgers they emulate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

I’m fine with them turning a blind eye to erp in private, in the same way they turn a blind eye to parsers in private. The instant that touches the public sphere is the instant the thunderbolt should strike, though.

Yes, brothel ads should be removed from pf and shout. Perhaps I was being too generous thinking people would just turn off shout.

Allow brothels no ingame avenue to advertise. They should do all of their communication on discord like the rmt tos dodgers they emulate.

---

Then I pose the question, but a hypothetical one because obviously we don't have the data but I expect the GM's would.

Would you rather:
They don't stop people advertising ERP venues but it means the GM's can moderate these communities better and catch out anybody who is doing stuff wrong, especially with minors? And therefore better prevent and catch more wrong doing.
or
They put a hard line action of keeping it out of PF & Shout but this is all pushed underground and out of the way, you no longer see it and it has no place out there, but GM's no longer have the visibility and it's a lot harder for them to catch wrong doing? Including stuff happening with minors and catch less wrong doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

Fair. They can't really come out saying "this is okay" or "you won't be moderated for engaging in this" but to instead saying putting emphasis on what it unacceptable, which in this case is breaking the law and violating the ToS. It then avoids making affirmative statements or stances. It then brings ambiguity on stuff that has a risk of breaking the law or breaking the ToS and people have to factor in the risk rather than assume "ah okay, it's all fine, they said so".

---

It is really really not a player thing to moderate this and it is really not SE's position to give these moderation tools to do something towards that SE does not officially support at all, it is in their position not acceptable at all, this is a private company not some country with a government, where you can demonstrate peacefully.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

Then I pose the question, but a hypothetical one because obviously we don't have the data but I expect the GM's would.

Would you rather:
They don't stop people advertising ERP venues but it means the GM's can moderate these communities better and catch out anybody who is doing stuff wrong, especially with minors? And therefore better prevent and catch more wrong doing.
or
They put a hard line action of keeping it out of PF & Shout but this is all pushed underground and out of the way, you no longer see it and it has no place out there, but GM's no longer have the visibility and it's a lot harder for them to catch wrong doing? Including stuff happening with minors and catch less wrong doing.

---

That’s a false choice.

Get the public ads out, drive the filth underground, enforce reports on vulgarity, and (like with the naughty mod debacle) issue bans when their activity is traced outside of the game. The instant Square finds out about this content is the instant that news has traveled too far and they need to take action.

Leaving things up and visible is the opposite way to fix the issue of players brazenly leaving their brothel doors open wide. Drive them underground, and the instant someone is told about them that doesn’t want them— ban the advertiser. Just like they do with parsers.

Blanket advertising a brothel under this system would be like navigating a minefield. If you even mention the place to the wrong person (or reveal the location to a menu of those services) you’d be risking your account.

Ultimately the entire goal is to have a chilling effect on discussing this content publicly, and only discussing this content with individuals you feel particularly trusting of. Individuals who could revoke their acceptance at any time with a report.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

Snip

---

And yet despite this scorched earth approach to parsers and mods, lots of people are still using them, are finding out about them and making use of them. It's pushed underground and it's still very present. Heck, we're mentioning parsing right now, we're acknowledging that such tools exist, YoshiP has made reference to their existence too, even naming one. So it doesn't require much for then somebody learning these exist to then seek them out.

And hey, that's fine when your concern is keeping this out of sight.

And this comes to the purpose of my question, which isn't a false question, but a hypothetical and conditional one. It's hypothetical because we don't have the evidence and data on what is the most effective method of keeping underage people away from content that's unsuitable for them. So really it lends no extra validity to what I think is the right answer nor extra validity to what you think is the right answer. It's conditional because your solution thus far seems to most favour only one of your argument which is the one is that you don't want to see any of this stuff in public, you not only don't think it has a place but you don't want to see these advertisements you don't want to know about people doing this stuff and you've made abundantly clear that you find these acts to be disgusting. That's your prerogative and in fairness, I've found myself accepting other arguments as to why it shouldn't be there (I don't think we'd see eye-to-eye on your reasoning here, because I don't find ERP to be disgusting the advertisements are inoffensive to me). What you've avoided is the question of what if what they're currently doing is the most pragmatic solution they have to keep minors safe. Hence the conditions of both statements.

And if the conditions were reversed, then yes, I'd accept ERP advertisements being taken down and for the people making them to take it to their own channels to arrange.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

And yet despite this scorched earth approach to parsers and mods, lots of people are still using them, are finding out about them and making use of them. It's pushed underground and it's still very present. Heck, we're mentioning parsing right now, we're acknowledging that such tools exist, YoshiP has made reference to their existence too, even naming one. So it doesn't require much for then somebody learning these exist to then seek them out.

And hey, that's fine when your concern is keeping this out of sight.

And this comes to the purpose of my question, which isn't a false question, but a hypothetical and conditional one. It's hypothetical because we don't have the evidence and data on what is the most effective method of keeping underage people away from content that's unsuitable for them. So really it lends no extra validity to what I think is the right answer nor extra validity to what you think is the right answer. It's conditional because your solution thus far seems to most favour only one of your argument which is the one is that you don't want to see any of this stuff in public, you not only don't think it has a place but you don't want to see these advertisements you don't want to know about people doing this stuff and you've made abundantly clear that you find these acts to be disgusting. That's your prerogative and in fairness, I've found myself accepting other arguments as to why it shouldn't be there (I don't think we'd see eye-to-eye on your reasoning here, because I don't find ERP to be disgusting the advertisements are inoffensive to me). What you've avoided is the question of what if what they're currently doing is the most pragmatic solution they have to keep minors safe. Hence the conditions of both statements.

And if the conditions were reversed, then yes, I'd accept ERP advertisements being taken down and for the people making them to take it to their own channels to arrange.

---

YoshiP, does not mind whatever you do in private, but do you enforce it on to the public or persons in ANYWAY as in showing it in PF/Shouts/tells/yells/linkshell/House adverts etc. in ANYWAY... then you will or may feel the hammer of doom if you get reported for it, so stop saying that it is ok with YoshiP, you been doing that throughout the entire thread, when it clearly is not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

Th bouncer anecdote Im not familiar with. But I wonder what the full circumstances are. Did the bouncer get fired by the establishment, or was he arrested and jailed/imprisoned? Did he have other issues that prompted the termination.

---

I dont know prior history + this was also well over 10 years ago now but where I'm from, having minors in your establishment is grounds for having the venue shut down for an investigation and the owner will receive a massive fine/potentially jail time or some other punishment if they've been serving minors for an extended period of time. From how I view the situation now as an adult, he was fired to protect the club so that didnt happen again.

(Sorry for the late reply)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Themarvin

YoshiP, does not mind whatever you do in private, but do you enforce it on to the public or persons in ANYWAY as in showing it in PF/Shouts/tells/yells/linkshell/House adverts etc. in ANYWAY... then you will or may feel the hammer of doom if you get reported for it, so stop saying that it is ok with YoshiP, you been doing that throughout the entire thread, when it clearly is not.

---

I'm not saying it is okay with YoshiP. Heck, I've previously explicitly pointed out that he has said to report it if you see it so they can investigate it. To me that implies he's not okay with it. Earlier in the thread I've said for people to just report it and avoid harassing players or taking it into their own hands. Let the GM's judge if wrong doing has been made.

I am not even saying it's okay for PF to be used this way or its okay for shouts to be used this way. My arguments in this respect have only been that it's okay for regular RP advertisements to be made.

What I am positing is that maybe the current GM strategy is the more effective method, where they're NOT being scorched earth about it.

And I can see logic if this were the case, because visibility and people reporting them may, if anything, alert them to wrong doing. I see flaws in the scorched earth method and I don't see that resolving the problem either and can see ways it could potentially make it worse. And I also concede if it is not their most effective method that other reasonable methods including taken action against these advertisements is fine.

But there are two arguments really. There's the one about keeping it out of the public eye and one about keeping minors from being caught up in sexual activity or people breaking the law in general. The two don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. Me personally? I only care about the second argument and is why I refer to YoshiP because he made clear his stance on this one, but I am indifferent on the first, they don't bother me but they bother other people and I 100% get why they'd be an issue. And they don't affect me directly because I don't partake, so really, I just sit on the fence with that one.

If the GM's judge it's better to scorch earth those advertisements for the sake of preventing wrong doing and fall back on "it's a teen rated game, not an adult one". Then it's fair.
If the GM's judge it's better to not scorch earth it and investigate case-by-case basis to catch illegal wrong doing & ToS violations. Then that's also fair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

But there are two arguments really. There's the one about keeping it out of the public eye and one about keeping minors from being caught up in sexual activity or people breaking the law in general. The two don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. Me personally? I only care about the second argument and is why I refer to YoshiP because he made clear his stance on this one, but I am indifferent on the first, they don't bother me but they bother other people and I 100% get why they'd be an issue. And they don't affect me directly because I don't partake, so really, I just sit on the fence with that one.

---

Just piggy backing off of this, I personally could give less of a crap what ya'll like to do sexually (unless kids are what get you off which is an entirely different story). My issue with bringing up the law like a broken record is that I'm honestly just trying to save people the trouble of dealing with kids/teens who can be incredibly spiteful or putting yourselves in a position of dealing with the police or jail time because their parents caught you talking dirty to their child. I know I've said this already somewhere in this thread, but I've had several friends who were lied to by minors, engaged in sharing photos and more. Ultimately when the truth came out that they were underage and my friends immediately stopped the relationships, ALL of the minors in every situation went batshit and tried to either ruin their entire lives online by spreading that they were a pedophile or tried to get them arrested in real life by involving their parents. Because they're kids and can't handle that they did something wrong/lost their boyfriend or girlfriend and think this is the appropriate response to it.

I can only speak on the US, but the majority of states here have the same viewpoint on adults engaging with minors: Adults have a legal responsibility to verify the age of every sexual partner, as impractical as it may be. This includes online as well. For example, Washington has CMIP (Communication with a Minor for Immoral Purposes) which outlines that online communications of a sexual nature with a minor, i.e. talking to them sexually (knowing their age or not) is a felony. Pennsylvania has a section of Megan's Law for the Sexual Abuse of Children which includes a bit for engaging with minors sexually online (engaging in prohibited or simulated sexual acts is referenced) which is also a felony. These are just two examples and I can keep going.

Also, for the people bringing up the ESRB rating and how it says "Sexual Themes", it means: "References to sex or sexuality." The description for "T" games in general is: "May contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language." "Suggestive themes" is defined as: "Mild provocative references or materials." So, for the US specifically, the "T" rating does not cover ERP, brothels, courts, descriptive sex, nudity, etc. It covers MILD, i.e. the braindead NPCs in Ul'Dah that dance and say the same thing over and over again. They're not going to come alive and offer to take you to a back room like the people who work at ERP venues will. There is a massive difference between the two and I really really hope that everyone is able to see that. Speaking again for the US, this game is meant for the age of 13+ (I know that PEGI and others exist and this is not the case around the world) but for the US specifically it is 13+. So those who are in the US are going to be held to that standard. Just because something is different in the UK (for example), does not make it okay to do in the US and you will not be protected by their laws as a US citizen.

I'm not gonna keep harping on this for much longer since there's not much else I can say, but it's up to the individual to care about protecting themselves from this. The way that I see it, if someone has nothing to hide and needs some ERP that badly, they shouldn't have an issue with presenting some form of age verification and I have provided a few examples in one of my earlier posts through how YOU can age verify someone WITHOUT using an ID. End of the day, it's on you. I hope that everyone stays safe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saefinn

I'm not saying it is okay with YoshiP. Heck, I've previously explicitly pointed out that he has said to report it if you see it so they can investigate it. To me that implies he's not okay with it. Earlier in the thread I've said for people to just report it and avoid harassing players or taking it into their own hands. Let the GM's judge if wrong doing has been made.

I am not even saying it's okay for PF to be used this way or its okay for shouts to be used this way. My arguments in this respect have only been that it's okay for regular RP advertisements to be made.

What I am positing is that maybe the current GM strategy is the more effective method, where they're NOT being scorched earth about it.

And I can see logic if this were the case, because visibility and people reporting them may, if anything, alert them to wrong doing. I see flaws in the scorched earth method and I don't see that resolving the problem either and can see ways it could potentially make it worse. And I also concede if it is not their most effective method that other reasonable methods including taken action against these advertisements is fine.

But there are two arguments really. There's the one about keeping it out of the public eye and one about keeping minors from being caught up in sexual activity or people breaking the law in general. The two don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. Me personally? I only care about the second argument and is why I refer to YoshiP because he made clear his stance on this one, but I am indifferent on the first, they don't bother me but they bother other people and I 100% get why they'd be an issue. And they don't affect me directly because I don't partake, so really, I just sit on the fence with that one.

If the GM's judge it's better to scorch earth those advertisements for the sake of preventing wrong doing and fall back on "it's a teen rated game, not an adult one". Then it's fair.
If the GM's judge it's better to not scorch earth it and investigate case-by-case basis to catch illegal wrong doing & ToS violations. Then that's also fair.

---

The GM did the right thing if this was involving any kind of sexual activity or the likes, there is nothing you can argue about it or against it, especially when you can not verify in anyway if it is a minor or not, therefor if it is reported in you have and will be viewed as having done something wrong and would most likely be told to not do such a thing again, and then, that it is what there is to say about that.

And even if no activity has happened, when it was reported in, then it still conflict with what the game is about and actions has to be taken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Themarvin

The GM did the right thing if this was involving any kind of sexual activity or the likes, there is nothing you can argue about it or against it, especially when you can not verify in anyway if it is a minor or not, therefor if it is reported in you have and will be viewed as having done something wrong and would most likely be told to not do such a thing again, and then, that it is what there is to say about that.

And even if no activity has happened, when it was reported in, then it still conflict with what the game is about and actions has to be taken.

---

In the case of the one GM that kicked off all these discussions, the error from what I understand was in the case of people who had committed no wrong doing getting caught in the crossfire (as many weren't even ERP but just regular RP) and that GM was found to have done it in error, the actions reversed but it looks like the purpose was going after genuine violations. Given this has been reviewed independently too and the errors corrected then yes, I expect now that all those who didn't have the actions reversed on their account probably did something wrong and they were probably right to take those actions.

If anything I found their handling of the situation to be encouraging because I think one of the concerns one can have about moderation is the issue of human error. It showed that community teams can review actions by GM's and correct any errors instead of doubling down on any decision made by a GM regardless of whether it was in error or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LianaThorne

Snip

---

I 100% agree with this and sounds similar to how it's handled here in the UK. I am of the same mind, I'd not want somebody with good intentions to get caught up in something that could potentially ruin their life because somebody lied about their age. I appreciated your perspective earlier in the thread, because for sure you are exposing yourself to a risk and really you should do everything you can to mitigate or avoid it, which really cuts through the "but it says 18+" arguments like that'll stop a teenager, who let's face it, aren't dumb.

In terms of the legal side my hot take is if a someone lies about their age to gain access to a bar, or get involved with online interactions that they should not be part of. They should receive the punishment the adult would have have faced if they were guilty. I feel far too many defend children and their actions with the same talking points they did not know the adult should have known better. People that try to ruin the lives of another person for their own personal enjoyment are scum and should be treated as such.

Though our legal system will never do that cause protect the children is deeply ingrained. Yes I am salty, my father had to resign from his teaching position and was forced into early retirement because some female students told their parents without any proof that he touched them and made advances at them. They had nothing on the cameras, no one else expect the girls in questions to corroborate said allegations. Everyone knew it was false but the risk of negative PR was too much for the school so they asked my father to kindly resign. So I have a bias in all of this, protecting the children mindset has great potential to harm innocent people, and I get cases like my old man and others have mentioned in the thread are rare, but personally just one in hundred thousand would be far to much.

Children are not dumb, let us be real often as children we feign ignorance because deep down to knew or age protected us to a degree, that needs to stop if parents cannot teach their children manipulation and lying about ones age for personal pleasure is wrong then maybe society should by treating them like the adults they so desire to want to be like. Ignorance is not an excuse for an adult should be the same for a child.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

In terms of the legal side my hot take is if a someone lies about their age to gain access to a bar, or get involved with online interactions that they should not be part of. They should receive the punishment the adult would have have faced if they were guilty. I feel far too many defend children and their actions with the same talking points they did not know the adult should have known better. People that try to ruin the lives of another person for their own personal enjoyment are scum and should be treated as such.

Though our legal system will never do that cause protect the children is deeply ingrained. Yes I am salty, my father had to resign from his teaching position and was forced into early retirement because some female students told their parents without any proof that he touched them and made advances at them. They had nothing on the cameras, no one else expect the girls in questions to corroborate said allegations. Everyone knew it was false but the risk of negative PR was too much for the school so they asked my father to kindly resign. So I have a bias in all of this, protecting the children mindset has great potential to harm innocent people, and I get cases like my old man and others have mentioned in the thread are rare, but personally just one in hundred thousand would be far to much.

Children are not dumb, let us be real often as children we feign ignorance because deep down to knew or age protected us to a degree, that needs to stop if parents cannot teach their children manipulation and lying about ones age for personal pleasure is wrong then maybe society should by treating them like the adults they so desire to want to be like. Ignorance is not an excuse for an adult should be the same for a child.

---

bad take, dude. bad take.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilkieTea

bad take, dude. bad take.

---

I get a feeling why you will say it is a bad take, just wondering what I said was considered unreasonable to you and why? From experience those who are against my stance simply have not lived through someone's life being altered by manipulative children.

Kids were not dumb, I knew how to play my parents and adults as a child we need to stop downplaying how manipulative teenagers can be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

I get a feeling why you will say it is a bad take, just wondering what I said was considered unreasonable to you and why? From experience those who are against my stance simply have not lived through someone's life being altered by manipulative children.

Kids were not dumb, I knew how to play my parents and adults as a child we need to stop downplaying how manipulative teenagers can be.

---

Your take on what you feel should be is completely unrelated to what is. For age-restricted activities, we always punish the person providing the access; not the child.

This is why erpers are a liability to Square and to themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

Your take on what you feel should be is completely unrelated to what is. For age-restricted activities, we always punish the person providing the access; not the child.

This is why erpers are a liability to Square and to themselves.

---

I know it is unrelated, I was just asking. Just because that is the way something is, and will work does not mean it is not possible to talk about other perspectives. It does not detract or hurt the discussion at hand.

My personal opinion on the matter and how I view this situation will be somewhat of a hot take, but...

This

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...00/point_1.PNG

Should be invalidated by this

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...32/Point_2.PNG

If you can't put a rating on what should be considered the lions share of the content of this game due to the volatility of individual personalities, then perhaps kids shouldn't be playing. If parents need be concerned over the possible content of what players are providing, then parents need to do their due diligence and clip these types of games from their children's repertoire of games. Liquor cabinets exist for a reason. Gun cabinets/safes exist for a reason. ESRB exists for a reason and the statement "Online interactions not rated by the ESRB" should be a red flag that should cause parents on some level to pause and wonder 'why?'.

But that's neither here nor there in the focal point of the topic or even by extension the ToS... so.. meh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kyuuen

My personal opinion on the matter and how I view this situation will be somewhat of a hot take, but...

This

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...00/point_1.PNG

Should be invalidated by this

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...32/Point_2.PNG

If you can't put a rating on what should be considered the lions share of the content of this game due to the volatility of individual personalities, then perhaps kids shouldn't be playing. If parents need be concerned over the possible content of what players are providing, then parents need to do their due diligence and clip these types of games from their children's repertoire of games. Liquor cabinets exist for a reason. Gun cabinets/safes exist for a reason. ESRB exists for a reason and the statement "Online interactions not rated by the ESRB" should be a red flag that should cause parents on some level to pause and wonder 'why?'.

But that's neither here nor there in the focal point of the topic or even by extension the ToS... so.. meh.

---

The reason why is because online interactions are very unpredictable with a wide array of discussions, and conversations taking place. To try and tangibly rate online interaction is just not really pragmatic for this very reason; you cannot predict what will take place, otherwise, any game that exhibits any form of online interaction should be rated as Mature (17+), or Adult Only (18+) just to account for that off-chance that something inappropriate may take place. I'd rather they not do this and just ask those involved in the community to exercise some consideration and caution as to not advertise mature content. Even if not for kids, I certainly don't enjoy seeing some of the advertisements that pop up whilst I'm browsing the PF, be it for temp fill-ins, or static recruitment posts on PF, or someone asking to get a link/preview to a specific piece of gear, or sets. I'm sure a good portion of players feel mutual on this too.

"Online interactions not rated by the ESRB" is there to cover the ESRB's rear, not the Publisher or Developer.

Square doesn't "have to" deal with harassment (unless a judge waves a paper at them), but the realities of business obligate them to create a community where people want to play a massive game multiplayer.

In the worst case scenario, however, Square does want to have the option to show the press/a judge "look what we do proactively to combat [this issue]" both with minors and with other illicit activity that takes place in their virtual worlds.

In some jurisdictions, especially considering such a wide geographical scope of the game, they inevitably have legal obligations that must be met. This could very well include protecting the minors that play their game.

It's one of the reasons why they can nuke your account for any reason they see fit; the TOS essentially boils down to "don't do these things, but we can ban you anyway if we just don't like you."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

I get a feeling why you will say it is a bad take, just wondering what I said was considered unreasonable to you and why? From experience those who are against my stance simply have not lived through someone's life being altered by manipulative children.

Kids were not dumb, I knew how to play my parents and adults as a child we need to stop downplaying how manipulative teenagers can be.

---

"Ignorance is not an excuse for an adult should be the same for a child."

Children's brains do not yet have the capacity to fully realize their actions and reactions. It is known that young children essentially have the brains of sociopaths - very little empathy, and extremely self-centered and manipulative. From a young age they learn that crying will get them what they want - this being food, baths, sleep, warm hugs, cuddles, toys, etc etc. As children age into teenagers they gain empathy sure, but there is still a HUGE disconnect. There is still a lot of vain, self-centered thought processes and behaviors. Children are not dumb- sure. But they DO lack the ability to properly think through the longterm consequences. Teens and children are motivated largely by what they want in that given moment, with no thought as to how it will impact the future.

"Ignorance is not an excuse for an adult should be the same for a child." It most DEFINITELY is an excuse. The ability to manipulate does not equate to the ability to think through the long term consequences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

In terms of the legal side my hot take is if a someone lies about their age to gain access to a bar, or get involved with online interactions that they should not be part of. They should receive the punishment the adult would have have faced if they were guilty. I feel far too many defend children and their actions with the same talking points they did not know the adult should have known better. People that try to ruin the lives of another person for their own personal enjoyment are scum and should be treated as such.

---

Just gonna stick my head back in to comment on this since I'm someone who has had experience with teens manipulating men. Not sure if you're unaware but no one ever said that it was okay and I don't think anyone is actually defending teenagers manipulating others. The point is that in the eyes of the law, the adult is the one responsible since they are supposed to be responsible enough to not engage with a minor. Minors and adults are also tried separately in court (at least in the US) because it would be irresponsible to think that an adult and a child/teen think in the same way in any capacity. That's why we have juvy for child/teen offenders because it's also irresponsible to hold a minor in the same prisons that you would hold adults. I'm sorry that you also have experienced this, but you can't be serious with your viewpoint on it.

To put it another way: Children/teens are literally ignorant until they get the experience needed to not be ignorant. Your teen years are meant for fucking up and figuring out how the world works to prepare you for being an adult. You said so yourself, you manipulated your parents and were aware of it, so should you have been held to the same standard as an adult if you had run into legal trouble via you manipulating the wrong person? I really doubt you're going to honestly say yes to that and believe it when it comes to yourself.

Your issue should not be with minors tbh, it should be with the institution considering they didn't help because they wanted to protect their reputation. That's literally disgusting and part of why situations in schools keep happening. Institutions need to start protecting their staff rather than worrying about what investors will think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

I get a feeling why you will say it is a bad take, just wondering what I said was considered unreasonable to you and why? From experience those who are against my stance simply have not lived through someone's life being altered by manipulative children.

Kids were not dumb, I knew how to play my parents and adults as a child we need to stop downplaying how manipulative teenagers can be.

---

I worked in a field for a long time where that was a very real threat and seen others fall victim to accusations. That said, one has nothing to do with the other. The fact is there is an overwhelming amount of opportunity and actual perpetration on children from adults. That is why such protections are put into place. One such very obvious, and very minimal method of protection is to not make sex chat hubs wildly available in PF of all bloody things. Using the bar ID as an example, you don't simply remove the need for an ID at a bar. Because now more kids will show up. At least the fake ID takes pre-meditated thought and effort to obtain the fake ID. Much like a kid needing to actively hunt down these ERP groups. The solution to this discussion isn't making it easier for them to enter areas they shouldn't be in.

To discuss a child's punishment for crying wolf is irrelevant to this particular discussion. Yeah it's a horrible reality for some, but it has nothing to do with PF.

Oh I do have a issue with the instantustions in place and how they often take the path of least resistance when it comes to these issues.

That being said I still stand by people often given children far too much protection because their minds are not fully developed and lack the experience required to think of the long term. Cause that logic does not follow even for adults that meet the same criteria. Some adults for whatever reason may not have the social experience / intelligence to navigate or understand the signs that someone else may be able to see. Adults always get the wrap they should have know they child was the victim in all this.

In the end maybe it is because I am the spectrum or it was because my parents were older they had me in their 50's. I can say for certain when I did something I understood the potential long term consequences I often did not just care cause I knew more often then not I would either get away with it or I could just ask for forgiveness instead of permission depending on how I spinned it.

People straight up do not give children enough credit when it comes to their thought process into making decisions. I get we have juvy. Though I am sorry if a teenager or anyone falsely misleads someone or whatever and the sets out to ruin their life when things do not pan out the way they wanted are scum and action depending on the context it should hold the same weight as murder.

Though I get it protect the children, parents are busy cannot be around their kids 24 / 7, often parents give their kids the benefit of the doubt etc . . .

To me really comes down if someone wants to act like an adult in one moment bet. Just do not try and play the child card I did not know when things go south. Own up to your choices. Also the brain development thing I find issue since aren't are brains nor fully developed until 25 or something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

To me really comes down if someone wants to act like an adult in one moment bet. Just do not try and play the child card I did not know when things go south. Own up to your choices. Also the brain development thing I find issue since aren't are brains nor fully developed until 25 or something?

---

Yes, our brains aren't fully developed until 25. Males develop at a slower pace, and the last thing to develop is the frontal cortex, which is responsible for memory, emotions, impulse control, problem solving, social interaction, and motor function.

I'm also on the spectrum, I also could reasonably think ahead of my actions, but I didn't think about my actions as they'd affect others, as they'd interact with actions in my far future, and how they'd interact with the actions and lives of others in the future. It is EXTREMELY HARD for teens and young adults to do so - though not entirely impossible.

Teens want to be adults, that's a fact. But they have no idea what being an adult is like. Things they do CAN HAVE IMPACTS MENTALLY they wouldn't have for us as adults.\

tl;dr: teen brain still young, teens are not adults, teens do not have same problem solving/social interaction/emotions/impulse control as adults.

Still does not follow if we use the same criteria. End of the day the same protections are not in place for adults that meet the same social and emotional intelligence and experience as a teenager. So clearly the development of the brain is not the factor and more so has to deal with tge social normative connotation that is associated with being a child. Which in turns gives children the means to manipulate others without much worry for their actions.

Everything you stated can be just as plausible for some adults so why not give them also the benefit of the doubt? If we want to provide child the same protections due to lack of experience problem solving etc. . . then we should offer the same protections to adults though I do get people will say that leaves it open to exploitation and abuse.

Once again Which is possible for children to do the same thing with the current situation. In the end let us be real no matter the age most do not care to take the time to think how their actions will impact others. We had an entire year grown ass adults doing just that. Though children get a pass. Do not get me wrong certain things I can let slide, Though actions that have the potential to ruin the life of another should be weighted differently. We as a society need to show that such actions are excusable no matter the age or reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

In the end let us be real no matter the age most do not care to take the time to think how their actions will impact others.

---

Wrong. I did a lot of fucked up stuff when I was younger because I genuinely didn't care and wanted to hurt my parents because I felt like I was being trapped by their rules. I was full blown dumpster fire bad. Like, it's literally a miracle I'm not dead from what I did to myself because I thought it was cool and would get me noticed by guys or whatever other reasons I had.

Now that I am almost 10 years older than I was then, I'm able to look back on my actions and realize how incredibly selfish and horrific I was to the people I love. I have matured enough, learned enough and grew enough as a person to know that doing what I did was wrong and that I could never ever do that again because it makes me sick to think about.

There's a massive difference between doing something stupid as a teen and doing something stupid as an adult. I'm sorry but no matter what was you try to spin it, you can't compare minors to adults mentally. You can't psychologically and you can't medically. Saying they should know better is all well and good, but someone can't know better until they or someone around them makes the mistake first. That's how you learn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LianaThorne

Wrong. I did a lot of fucked up stuff when I was younger because I genuinely didn't care and wanted to hurt my parents because I felt like I was being trapped by their rules. I was full blown dumpster fire bad. Like, it's literally a miracle I'm not dead from what I did to myself because I thought it was cool and would get me noticed by guys or whatever other reasons I had.

Now that I am almost 10 years older than I was then, I'm able to look back on my actions and realize how incredibly selfish and horrific I was to the people I love. I have matured enough, learned enough and grew enough as a person to know that doing what I did was wrong and that I could never ever do that again because it makes me sick to think about.

There's a massive difference between doing something stupid as a teen and doing something stupid as an adult. I'm sorry but no matter what was you try to spin it, you can't compare minors to adults mentally. You can't psychologically and you can't medically. Saying they should know better is all well and good, but someone can't know better until they or someone around them makes the mistake first. That's how you learn.

---

That is the thing as you said you did not care how your actions impacted others, adults also do not care about how the actions impact others age is not really the only factor here. Sure mistakes are how we learn, but I am sorry if your mistake ends up running the life of someone else I do not care how sorry or how ignorant you are were. You should face a harsh punishment for said action. Somethings simply should not be waved away because of I am a child tho, I did not know tho, I did not understand how my actions would impact others tho, I did not care tho. Those are horrible excuses.

Certain actions we can move past and let them learn, but others DUI's, false allegations, murder etc . . . I do not care if you are a child you done messed up and you should pay a fitting price cause the person that life was negatively impacted by your actions may not get a second chance. I am sorry I do not get why should the child or teenager in question get the benefit of the doubt cause they do not have the social experience or social intellenge to the average adult to make proper choice and understand the lasting impact it will have on others.

Yet adults that also do not have the same understanding when it comes to social queues or understanding are still treated as if they should know better? Many factors can impact development not just age, so why is age the only factor that seems to matter to so many? Do not get me wrong I do not think either one is an excuse, but if we are going to draw a line I wish people would be more consistent with their view. I get the child protection aspect musters up a strong emotional response people generally want to protect and persevere children giving them room to grow and learn which is fine. Though actions should be inexcusable and pretending to be an adult then spinning it in your favor to get the adults in trouble cause they should have know is honestly silly. We should not protect people like that.

I will agree In certain situations doing something dumb as a kid differs from an adult. Though if that dumb action leads to lasting negative impact on the life on another I am sorry if you are a child you should not get lighter punishment or general understanding because of your age. I know many will not agree with it, but sometimes the action itself should overshadow the age.

Also I have issue with kids will be kids statement that some people have, cause I was made fun of due to my mannerisms and speech patterns due to degree of ASD. Always got the same excuse kids will be kids, suck it up you will grow out of it. Kids can be just as ruthless and cold as adults, yet because they are kids it kinda gets a pass. I am sorry it hurts either way no matter the age. Sometimes I want to drop kick a kid because they laugh at my tick in the store or stare at me just like others use to do when I was a their age. I do not cause I am older, and even when you kindly ask their parents if they could educate their children they look at you like you are the creep. This is a deep personal issue for me cause I think people should be held accountable for their actions no matter the age. Since I do think this aspect of protecting such behavior cares over to when the children become adults, then have children of their own. They use the same logic I was like that as a kid I grew up and understood how my actions were wrong years later. Thing is a person you may be able to go home forget about it and come to terms with it years later. The pain for the person in questions sometimes never goes away cause they are reminded of it daily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

That is the thing as you said you did not care how your actions impacted others, adults also do not care about how the actions impact others age is not really the only factor here. Sure mistakes are how we learn, but I am sorry if your mistake ends up running the life of someone else I do not care how sorry or how ignorant you are were. You should face a harsh punishment for said action. Somethings simply should not be waved away because of I am a child tho, I did not know tho, I did not understand how my actions would impact others tho, I did not care tho. Those are horrible excuses.

Certain actions we can move past and let them learn, but others DUI's, false allegations, murder etc . . . I do not care if you are a child you done messed up and you should pay a fitting price cause the person that life was negatively impacted by your actions may not get a second chance. I am sorry I do not get why should the child or teenager in question get the benefit of the doubt cause they do not have the social experience or social intellenge to the average adult to make proper choice and understand the lasting impact it will have on others.

Yet adults that also do not have the same understanding when it comes to social queues or understanding are still treated as if they should know better? Many factors can impact development not just age, so why is age the only factor that seems to matter to so many? Do not get me wrong I do not think either one is an excuse, but if we are going to draw a line I wish people would be more consistent with their view. I get the child protection aspect musters up a strong emotional response people generally want to protect and persevere children giving them room to grow and learn which is fine. Though actions should be inexcusable and pretending to be an adult then spinning it in your favor to get the adults in trouble cause they should have know is honestly silly. We should not protect people like that.

---

Teens, on a whole, do not have the CAPACITY to care for how their interactions impact others, is the difference you're failing to realize. Adults have the capacity, teens don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilkieTea

Teens, on a whole, do not have the CAPACITY to care for how their interactions impact others, is the difference you're failing to realize. Adults have the capacity, teens don't.

---

If an adult has the social intelligence of a child in terms of social norms that is their capacity. Many factors go into brain development and certain aspects cane be stunted by environmental or lack of certain social interactions without impacting other factors of development. Capacity is a weird standard to go based off since many factors go into capacity for an action.

Also some teens do have capacity to understand how their actions impact others, so clearly age is primary factor here. Now if you are trying to say it harder for teens to empathize with another persons situation and this leads to discontent between actions I can agree with that, though same could also be said for adults. Every criteria mentioned can be sad for adults minus age. Though age is clearly not 100% factor cause we have children that understand how their actions impact others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

If an adult has the social intelligence of a child in terms of social norms that is their capacity.

---

And under the law there are exceptions for this, dependent on where you are. However, I don't see why you're bringing this up when that wasn't what you were talking about before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

If an adult has the social intelligence of a child in terms of social norms that is their capacity. Many factors go into brain development and certain aspects cane be stunted by environmental or lack of certain social interactions without impacting other factors of development. Capacity is a weird standard to go based off since many factors go into capacity for an action.

Also some teens do have capacity to understand how their actions impact others, so clearly age is primary factor here.

---

I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and state the obvious that we aren't going to see eye to eye. Your bias is driven by specific circumstances and your choosing to fixate on those circumstances rather than the issue as a whole, which is what I'm arguing with because that's what is relevant with this situation. To be honest this has gotten pretty far off topic in the grand scheme of things. All I'm going to say is that (and this is probably a hard pill to swallow) the law (in cases with adults being accused of stuff with minors) only cares about age and will take the side of the child unless legitimate proof can be proven otherwise that it didn't happen. That is literally all that is relevant. Specific circumstances are all well and good and potentially can be treated differently depending on the case/judge/etc., but the biggest factor is going to be age and if the adult can prove without a doubt that they did not do it. Be pissed at it all you want, it literally does not matter and won't change.

I'm calling it quits on this topic unless someone decides to quote me. I'm tired of beating my head against a brick wall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilkieTea

And under the law there are exceptions for this, dependent on where you are. However, I don't see why you're bringing this up when that wasn't what you were talking about before.

---

I am bringing it up cause by most peoples standards an adult is an adult. Which prob stems from the fact that most do not see a difference between emotional intelligence and general intelligence. Most laws offer protections for general intelligence deficiencies.

I am just showing every reason that you have offered as to why we should treat children differently can be attributed to an adult. Age and every correlated with age standardly seems to be primary factor as to why such protections are offered. Though age is not a consistent standard, so if you are willing to grant that adults that meet the same standard you listed above as to why children have protections then cool.

I still disagree I think no matter the context if someone does something that has a lasting negative impact on their life they should face an extremely harsh punishment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LianaThorne

I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and state the obvious that we aren't going to see eye to eye. Your bias is driven by specific circumstances and your choosing to fixate on those circumstances rather than the issue as a whole, which is what I'm arguing with because that's what is relevant with this situation. To be honest this has gotten pretty far off topic in the grand scheme of things. All I'm going to say is that (and this is probably a hard pill to swallow) the law only cares about age. That is literally all that is relevant. Specific circumstances are all well and good and potentially can be treated differently depending on the case/judge/etc., but the biggest factor is going to be age. Be pissed at it all you want, it literally does not matter and won't change.

I'm calling it quits on this topic unless someone decides to quote me. I'm tired of beating my head against a brick wall.

---

Oh I agree 100% the law only cares about the age that is my problem since age is not a consistent factor yet it is treated as such due to the nature of it being easy to tie a number to something. Oh I also know nothing will change it is how we are but still makes for fun discussions. Given the text it may seem like I am pissed, I am not pissed. Annoyed how generally everyone takes the path of least resistance on such topics, but not pissed. I just enjoy talking with others who have differing views even if it will not change anything that is how I gain understanding to the general world around me.