Hip Forums Age Limit?

i say no limits, these are free speech forums why would you cut out younger people that have things to say.

 

My vote goes with leave it as it is, but for some parts (such as hot'n'horny) move it to 16+

 

Raise it and then what?
People just lie about their age. Not a real solution, it only brings more liars to the Hipfora.

 

I'm with Bird.

 

It seems that the ages clump together on different forums. Most have a typically aged user. I haven't seen imature people disrupt a forum or thread too much. (Thank you moderators). Most age restrictions are to keep the young ones away from "adult material." I don't think that youths are that fragile. I do think it is important for the youth to mix with their elders. Humans need examples (and options). If WE can't form an all ages community, how can we hope that the world will.

 

I think the age limit's OK.
Really think we should implement a prerequisite IQ test though.

 

When I was 12, 13, 14, 15, shit any of those ages, i would have loved the blessing of being exposed to something like this....dont rob them of it..

 

Exactly. As far as I'm concerned, no age limit. I didn't know that there was any age limit (13?)-if that is the age limit, it certainly shouldn't be any higher than that.

 

I voted for no age limit.

I just believe people of any age should have a place to interact and share opinions, given that they all do so with a level of respect so as to minimize flaming/trolling.

 

Would this be ex post facto?

Should you adopt this measure, would those under age still be able to post here, or will they be restricted until they reach a certain age?

 

PHILOSOPHICALLY, I say NO age limit...but...legally

Perhaps the only age limitations should be in areas which may inadvertently put other members at legal risk.

Areas dealing with Sex or Drugs maybe. Just for legal reasons.

I don't agree with the laws on sex OR drugs, but for the sake of the site it is better to limit the possibility of legal conflict.

For those who disagree with the age limitation (and philosophically I do), remember that no one is coming through the screen to check an ID. It is possible that someone who is 14 or 15 could register as 18 or older and there is no verification process. It's just an honor system. This way, if someone lied about their age, it would be their violation of the law and HipForums wouldn't be held responsible -- because the person would've agreed that they were (say) 16 or older.

But, at least that would limit the possible hassle that the Website may face from puritan "do-gooders" in the future.

Open violation of the law is effective when the law becomes a threat to the very existence of an idea, but as of now, it is not. Thus, complying with limitations (even if just in an honor system) would at least help the argument that we (as a site) were attempting to abide by the law, in case of future hassle.

Ok, let's here the rebuttal, guys...

 

And one more thing:

It would prevent any government undercover assholes or self-righteous vigilante groups from infilitrating the site and trying to shut it down under the guise of "protection of the children". Since, if any law was broken, it would be by the one who lied about their age.

 

Leave as is.

 

With puritan paranoia of "harmful to minors" in this day and age, the best bet (from a legal standpoint) would be requiring that the member agree to be 16 or older (example age), and if they are not (there is no screen police, obviously) and legal hassle came about-- at least HipForums would be free of the responsibility and the legal violation (if any) would fall solely on the shoulders of the one who agreed to the terms.

Of course, those who are younger may disagree at first, but it is likely that you would sign up as 16 or older anyway and have an account-- it's just that HipForums couldn't be held responsible by today's paternal lawmakers if you did something illegal and stupid.

I, philosophically, DISAGREE with age restriction, but we have to begin with what we have legally first. In order to change that, you must agree that cultural revolution should come from protest and demand rather than outright breaking of the law and having the whole site dismantled.

That wouldn't do any of us any good. All we need is more negative media attention--like MySpace is getting and the paranoid assholes trying to keep things "decent" and in their "order" using the "protect the children" mantra as a means to their own self-righteous end.

If the site was shut down for no good reason, then is the time for civil disobedience.

 

Well, im 15, soon to be 16, and i think it should be raised, not really sure why, but i think to 14, i would say 16, but i dont want to discount myself, lol

 

age limit Love and Sex..to 16 maybe..leave the rest as is....if you have to age limit anything.

 

A lot of people seem to think it would be better for people under 16 to get their information about Love & Sex from the main stream media rather than the forum here. I disagree.

 

That's not the case at all, Mike. As I have stated, I believe in free expression and I don't support age limits, but legally you still have to have some kind of protective measure for the Forums.

By requiring that a member agree that they are 16 or older, we are eliminating any kind of legal trouble that can be used against HF by the puritans and their laws. If anyone gets into trouble, it would be the individual who lied. But, as we know, a shake-down is NOT LIKELY, thus several members could sign in as 16 and we'd never even know it.

But, for protective measures....eh...