Tephra ([info]tephra) wrote in [info]ideas,
@ 2007-12-28 01:17:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Automatic age verification
As a maintainer of an adult oriented asylum I would dearly love to have some internal automatic age verification. Right now maintainers have to manually check the age of anyone requesting to join their communities and this forces people to publicly display at least the year portion of their date of birth (or to email the maintainers, creating more work for everyone).

What I would like to have:

1. A hidden tag on accounts to mark them 18+. This would be opt-in and would not require any publicly visible information in their profile (though I suppose some people might want it visible and maybe that should be opt-in as well).

2. A setting on asylums that restricts memberships to 18+ and automatically checks for the tag on any account that tries to join.

People from LJ probably recognize this as the only useful part of their flagging system.

Related to this, if an asylum is restricted to 18+ it should be possible for a maintainer to make public, unrestricted, posts. This gives the option of putting some asylum information on the main page and not just in the asylum info (and makes the layouts prettier). LJ users will notice that this is not possible with LJ's flagging system.

Tangentially related question: Is there currently a way to set an asylum friends only AND have public posts? I figured out how to friends lock my asylum through the admin console but as far as I can tell I cannot set the security of posts to public now. I'd like to have a "no, this really isn't dead, just adults only" post while having the default security on new posts be friends only. :)

Entirely unrelated: The "read this first" post linked in this asylum's info hasn't been updated since 2005 and was made by a deleted account. Maybe that should be updated?

(Post a new comment)


[info]lostdreamer
2007-12-28 06:25 am UTC (link)
Wholly agreed. Since InsaneJournal is not an 18+ site, this sort of thing would be useful - but completely optional, since LJ's adult "initiative" is lacking.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]tephra
2007-12-28 06:40 am UTC (link)
I want it because I am a laaaaazy moderator. :D

Yes, here it would really by optional all around, unlike LJ's "it's entirely optional but everyone and their goat can flag your stuff as explicit and get you banninated" program.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]lostdreamer
2007-12-28 06:47 am UTC (link)
Optional is a good thing. I mean, when one's own journal gets cut to oblivion because you're on a different computer, you know it's messed up. -_-

Lazy moderators are better than... no moderators? I dunno. XD

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]tephra
2007-12-28 06:58 am UTC (link)
LJ's penchant for randomly logging people out just adds to the annoyance factor as well. :P

I'd just rather be reading the porn than making sure everyone else is old enough to be reading it too. :D

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]lostdreamer
2007-12-28 07:25 am UTC (link)
Yup yup. 'Course, half the time I browse on a DS of all things, so I get logged out virtually every other time I click, so I'm used to that XD

And ahahahah. The internet is for porn.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]xie_xie_xie
2007-12-28 06:53 am UTC (link)
I don't want InsaneJournal keeping track of the ages of its users. I don't police the ages of people who use my journal or my asylums, and I don't intend to. I'm not the world's mommy. The more IJ does to require or facilitate this, the less happy I will be.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]tephra
2007-12-28 07:10 am UTC (link)
That is why it would be opt-in, for those of us that do want to do the token effort (and it is a token since lying about your age on the internet is trivial).

In the FAQ here there is this line to consider:

"If you are the maintainer of an asylum in which users regularly post explicit images, you must monitor the membership of your asylum carefully to make sure that all of your members are of legal age to view such material. Again, this is to protect both you and InsaneJournal."

My suggestion comes from a desire to comply with Squeaky's request with less effort on my part, and less disclosure of personal information on the part of users wishing to join my asylum.

There is nothing in my suggestion that would require you to use it for your journals or asylums.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]xie_xie_xie
2007-12-28 07:11 am UTC (link)
I understand.... I just hate it. Of course I would do nearly anything for squeaky. I just resent having to babysit other people's children. :(

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]tephra
2007-12-28 07:14 am UTC (link)
I view it as being able to ignore the fact I'm babysitting. :D Once the settings are done I don't have to go look at everyone's profile before I let them in the door.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]xie_xie_xie
2007-12-28 07:28 am UTC (link)
I know, and honestly, the piece that irritates me is having to flag my own journal or asylum in some way as being "adult" or "explicit." It makes it so much easier later for someone to come to me and say that I knew I was posting stuff no innocent kiddies should see, and seems to me that it makes me more, rather than less, liable.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]tephra
2007-12-28 07:42 am UTC (link)
I figured my proposed system would be invisible really, unlike LJ's, unless for some reason people opted to make it visible on their own journals/asylums. Most adult oriented asylums already "out" themselves in their info so having an automated accept/reject based on a hidden age tag wouldn't make them stand out any more than usual.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]xie_xie_xie
2007-12-28 07:44 am UTC (link)
True, my journal's info page already says "Important notice: In case your parents for some reason let you wander the internets unsupervised, unless you're of legal age to read adult material wherever it is that you live, please don't read my journal."

And yet I whine. ;)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]tephra
2007-12-28 07:55 am UTC (link)
*laughs* :)

I admit, I've been reluctant to make the suggestion because I knew the first thing people are going to think of is LJ's flagging system. I was, and still am, expecting to get jumped on for making the suggestion just because of that association.

LJ is really good at taking a good idea and beating all the good out of it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]skuf
2007-12-28 07:38 am UTC (link)
I agree.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]snapelike
2007-12-28 08:54 am UTC (link)
Oh please, no. No LJ 'we're watching you'. Things like this is why a lot of us left LJ in the first place. The more of this we get, the more responsibility for other people's surfing we take upon us...

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]keieeeye
2007-12-28 11:23 am UTC (link)
It would only be used for asylums that ALREADY require you to be 18 to join, though. As it is at the moment, you have to have your full birthdate visible in your profile so the maintainer knows you're 18 so they can accept you, and it's an awful lot of work for a maintainer to check the age of every single person who wants to join. If you don't want to join an asylum that bills itself as 18+ it wouldn't affect you at all, the way I'm reading it. The only way it would, is if you choose to turn it on for the purposes of joining an asylum that would be checking how old you are anyway. It just means that you don't have to display your whole birthdate in your profile, and the maintainer has less work to do.

I assume that if the asylum didn't require friends-locked posting, you'd be able to read all the posts anyway, they wouldn't be behind the stupid cuts. If they do require friends-locked posting, well, it's exactly the same as how the system already is. If you're under 18, the maintainer won't let you join, you can't read the posts.

The vast majority of asylums wouldn't bother with something like this, so it really would only affect the users who want it to affect them.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]tephra
2007-12-28 07:14 pm UTC (link)
Exactly.

All I'm wishing for is a bit of automation for adult oriented asylums that wish to abide by Squeaky's request to monitor the age of their members, and privacy for the members themselves.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]snapelike
2007-12-29 06:01 pm UTC (link)
I think the problem is that as soon as the tool is there, it ends up being expected one uses it. I own a 800+ members NC-17 comm, and I don't want to close anything. I moved it from LJ because I suddenly had to nurse other people's children, and I so don't want that. Our authors warn, rate and lj-cut, and we don't want to make our (shy) lurkers become members if they don't want to.

I don't think Squeaky would require us to use such a tool, but others might, ie: Warriors of idioc- er- Innocence and their likes. If it's there, there will be bitching over it, I'm sure, even if I can see its usefulness as such.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]keieeeye
2007-12-29 06:41 pm UTC (link)
Well personally, I can see how the tool would be incredibly useful, but I can also see that if Squeaky even tried to bring it in, a lot of people would be very, very unhappy, even given the assurances above because some people lack critical thinking and go with the herd :P.

Our authors warn, rate and lj-cut, and we don't want to make our (shy) lurkers become members if they don't want to.

They wouldn't have to. The tool would only be used when someone actually is joining the asylum. It wouldn't use the stupid censoring cuts. The only way it's at all similar to what LJ uses is that, IF you choose to turn it on (which I imagine would just mean clicking a box that says you're 18), it tells the maintainer of an asylum that you're 18 if you try to join and the asylum has an "18+" flag (which I imagine would just mean clicking a box that says "this asylum is 18+"). It wouldn't be used to censor anything, just to cut down on the work of checking every prospective member's userinfo to see what their birthdate is.

but others might, ie: Warriors of idioc- er- Innocence and their likes.

They can't. They don't own this site.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]qem_chibati
2007-12-28 01:15 pm UTC (link)
Yes. There is a way to set your asylum, to friends only AND have public posts.

The friendslock command only effects the initial post - members and yourself can edit the security level.

Uh, which is why I have to check one of my flocked communities for public posts.

There is no way to stop the editing to public.





Personally while I like having automation for the age checking for restricted comms, I'm not so sure about the flocking, since LJ's system fails somewhat in that regard.

The other thing that is fucked up with LJ's flagging system is the removal of LJ-cuts - it means that warnings are unable to be seen outside of the post which makes it harder for people to know what the post is about...

I think with LJ's current setting there is a way to do a pinned / note thing that will stay up despite flagging. It's only with some layouts and comes under the custimsation options.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]tephra
2007-12-28 07:03 pm UTC (link)
*fiddles* Yay, a public post. Though apparently only people that are already members can comment on it. Drat. I was hoping to give them a quick way to state their age in a screened comment when they try to join. Oh well.

The only aspect I want from LJ's system is the age check on join attempt.

I don't want any of their stupid content cuts, a well written post with a plain old lj-cut is just fine and ultimately just as secure (since if you're underage and logged out all you have to do is click the "yeah, I'm 18+" button anyway, if you didn't lie when you set up your LJ in the first place). I most especially do not want anything that allows anyone other than the original poster (or in communities, the mods) to flag individual posts or journals.

I just don't want to have to manual check user info pages for dates, nor do I want to force people to display their personal information just to join my asylum.

Hmm, the guest book entry (on layouts that have it) isn't covered in LJ's flagging system? Interesting.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]qem_chibati
2007-12-29 05:09 am UTC (link)
> *fiddles* Yay, a public post. Though apparently only people that are already members can comment on it. Drat. I was hoping to give them a quick way to state their age in a screened comment when they try to join. Oh well.

Er that's just a setting in the community options - you've set it so that only registered users can post (of which there really isn't any point since you can't comment anon on a friendslocked post... *g* )

Give me a sec I'll see where you set it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]qem_chibati
2007-12-29 05:12 am UTC (link)
Go here: http://www.insanejournal.com/manage/comments/

Select work as user *community name* - enable commenting from registered users or everyone...

Registered users should just be - has an InsaneJournal account.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]tephra
2007-12-29 06:02 am UTC (link)
Thank you!

Thinks are just enough different from LJ to leave me pulling my hair at times.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]tamashitoshiro
2007-12-28 07:43 pm UTC (link)
As yer co-maintainer, I WANT that option NOW!

I hate having to interupt my work to manually check birthdates.. *iz the QUEEN of lazy!* hahaha

(Reply to this)


[info]efleck999
2007-12-29 09:57 am UTC (link)
Instead of all of this, how about an alternative.

Put a disclaimer on the profile explaining the
age requirements. If they join anyways, and they
are underage, then it's their problem, not yours.

I mean... it shouldn't be your problem.
The parents are the ones who are letting their
kids go on the internet unrestricted.
If you really care... then check. Or ask.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]rymack
2008-01-03 05:15 am UTC (link)
I think the problem is there is a 'rule' that says a community has to check the birthdate of its members.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]niciasus
2008-01-01 01:00 am UTC (link)
Gah, how I hate this censorship of our own media. I do understand, but I wish the kiddies would go, where, Disneyland, perhaps. And their parents would get off their collective backsides and take responsibility for their children net habits. End of Rant.

Since we can't change the internet back to the stone age (we had fun) and I certainly don't want Squeaky to be troubled, this sounds like a good idea. At least we won't be forced to give our birth date in the profile.

(Reply to this)

[ Home | Update Journal | Login/Logout | Search | Browse Options | Site Map ]