Question on TOS?

See what happens when an eight-year-old is allowed to comment on PFB?
hehe

how this got so complicated. The site existed just fine before so
many changes took place. Even if people were complaining about the
comments, it wasn't stopping the site from thriving. So now in an
attempt to address the complaints, we have a moderation system in
place that has done nothing but cause the site to deteriorate. Wasn't
the purpose of the moderation to make the site better? As far as I
can tell, the moderation is at the root of everything that's going
wrong.

I think this can be settled (or at least, we'll have a route to settle
it) with one question: what's the purpose of PlanetFeedback? (OK,
more specifically, what's the purpose of allowing commenting?)

Frankly, if the TOS didn't exist (outside of the few things that have
to do with legal issues), this site COULD thrive as a place where
people come to abuse each other. The people that don't like to be
abused? Well, they'd leave. And this place would get the reputation
as being a place to avoid if you don't light fighting.

But clearly that's not the goal of whoever runs this site. (I'm
honestly not sure if Pete is involved any more and if this site is
still used as a resource for his "day job"). Whoever runs this site
has a reason for allowing certain comments, making the exceptions they
do, and so forth.

I'm cynical. I don't think I'll ever see an explanation of why this
site REALLY continues to exist. I said this before: I'm skeptical
that this site exists, today, as a generous act to allow people to
easily write letters to companies. Why do I say this? Because of the
comments. Even with a strong-handed TOS, there's still enough that's
allowed that drives away people that want only agreement.

And I'm skeptical that this is a "Tell 3000" fishbowl, because of the
comments that DO get removed. If this was really a place to show
companies what people think, there would be no removal of comments
(with a very small number of exceptions).

Anyway, when it comes to moderation, the best type is community
moderation. Let the community decide. The only reason (besides the
work involved in making software changes) not to, I think, is that
what the community wants would be in conflict with what the
owner/management wants.

How do we know the 8-year old ever came to PlanetFeedback?
Maybe he wrote the letter by hand or on a word processing program, and
his mom or whomever Debra R. might be chose PlanetFeedback as the
means to send such letter.

If the account is in the name of someone who is eligible for
membership, and under their supervision, someone ineligible send a
letter, is it that big of a deal?

I think the 13 and up rule is a result of law as previously mentioned.
This is not necessarily a "rule", but a requirement for anyone
collecting personal information online such as names and addresses. It
is not PFB specific. All websites have this same rule.

My thought is that since the TOS also serves a legal purpose, this
section was likely added to be in legal compliance and to avoid any
issues that may arise.

To the people below -
I think this part of the TOS is a legal issue - collecting information
from users under the age of 13 is governed by the Children's Online
Privacy Protection Act.

I got the impression that it was under a parent's account as well.

I don't think moaning about the 13+ rule is apples to apples with
commenting rules. One is site policy and the other one is law governed
by the FTC.

Perhaps the TOS should be revised. Many kids of the age of that
letter writer have been online for a few years and surely this site
provides a communication tool that kids can use as well as adults.

If this is done to protect kids: I feel that the level of moderation
on this provides a much safer environment for a young person to
interact with adults than other websites. If any conversation were to
get inappropriate, it likely would get dealt with promptly.

I just don't think using this site provides much risk to kids, and I
think kids have a lot to offer a site like this.

Yes, our TOS does require users be at least 13 years old. In this case
we made an exception for the following reasons:

1. Every indication is that the 8 year was using an adult account,
most likely a relative.

2. It was a great letter. We are happy to provide a way for this young
person to offer feedback.

He has written two letters so far. If this person continues to write
letters then we will certainly take another look at the situation
however we're not particularly worried about it at the moment.

Thanks for helping make sure folks use our site properly!

Good Eye, didnt catch that.

Wonder what will happen?!?!?! Hmmmmmm


Good Day