[Veritas]

The only age limitation I think would be even close to appropriate would be something along the lines of COPPA, you must be 13 or older, but even that would be pushing it imo. However, {UFP} is based in the UK so COPPA doesn't apply, nor is it ever enforced even on US websites to my knowledge.

I think that {UFP} members should be judged on maturity, not age (and I say that knowing I'm not the most mature of the bunch!).

I can only again point to myself, Taisen, and Jenson as examples, as well as others. I believe that we would lose a large number of members if we began to impose age restrictions, and I haven't heard of any age-related issues recently.

I think the only situation in which an age restriction would be wise is if we were faced with an order from the government of the United Kingdom to enforce UK law. Otherwise, I don't think it's necessary or feasible. People would just lie.

[Chris Wilkinson]

I believe that there should be an age restriction and I would wholly agree with it, there are laws you need to consider, and they have to be taken seriously.

Before you ask, No I dont know what they are, but I do know, one would be hte Data Protection Act

[Sharpkiller]

The only age limitation I think would be even close to appropriate would be something along the lines of COPPA, you must be 13 or older, but even that would be pushing it imo. However, {UFP} is based in the UK so COPPA doesn't apply, nor is it ever enforced even on US websites to my knowledge.

I think that {UFP} members should be judged on maturity, not age (and I say that knowing I'm not the most mature of the bunch!).

I can only again point to myself, Taisen, and Jenson as examples, as well as others. I believe that we would lose a large number of members if we began to impose age restrictions, and I haven't heard of any age-related issues recently.

I think the only situation in which an age restriction would be wise is if we were faced with an order from the government of the United Kingdom to enforce UK law. Otherwise, I don't think it's necessary or feasible. People would just lie.

As I said, it is a United States law, but I am pretty certain that similar laws exist in other countries. It's something to investigate.

Just because a law isn't regularly enforced, that doesn't mean it's right to break it. People will lie if they wish, and there's nothing we can do about that. However, if there is a similar UK law, we can't legally and knowingly collect information from juveniles under the age of 13.

[Telex Ferra]

If someone comes here and signs up and doesn't tell their age, then {UFP} is not responsible. Why not just leave it at don't ask, don't tell?

[Chris Wilkinson]

If someone comes here and signs up and doesn't tell their age, then {UFP} is not responsible. Why not just leave it at don't ask, don't tell?

As IF something happened, that pushed hte fleet into a legal situation, then that just wouldnt fly as a defences.

I believe, better safe than sorry

[Veritas]

I'd like to enquire: if this is such an issue and the {UFP} is on such perilous ground not conforming to these laws, why has this never been brought up before as far as I can recall?

Frankly, if we don't collect that information from our members or don't collect it from all members, I don't see what the problem is. If our members aren't asked to give their age, what is the problem?

[Sharpkiller]

I'd like to enquire: if this is such an issue and the {UFP} is on such perilous ground not conforming to these laws, why has this never been brought up before as far as I can recall?

Frankly, if we don't collect that information from our members or don't collect it from all members, I don't see what the problem is. If our members aren't asked to give their age, what is the problem?

It is not a big issue, nor is it really a concern. It's better to make a change willing, rather than have a government loitering over your shoulder making sure you do. Anything that can uniquely identify a person is deemed personal information. That includes e-mail addresses, locations, and so forth.

[Alex L.]

Things are only going to be a problem if someone makes it a problem. And that only happens when things get so badly out of hand that nothing other than a legal procedure would be in order.

We are hosted by a webcompany. What happens is that any claiming legal party would try sending a cease&desist letter to the hosting company. If the arguments are juridically sound, the hosting company would simply shut the site down to prevent a lawsuit . There's bound to be some clauses in the contract that lets them do that in case the law is breached.

When I was an administrator in the now disbanded ERP (elite force/rpg-x roleplaying) we did once send a C&D to a hosting company ourselves because our copyrights were being infringed by one of their clients. The host of their webstite decided to pull them out of the air because they violated their terms of service, and thus prevented any legal action. (we couldn't afford to go to trial, but the hosting company didn't know that, lol)

Anyway, this is all very highly unlikely, but it doesn't hurt to make the UFP in compliance with all available law on the subject. (And it'd be another argument why we are better than all other groups in every way...:mrgreen

[John Hathaway]

This isn't major issue, as I eluded to in my original post, but rather something I wanted to gauge people's opinions on. As a growing fleet, with a professional outfit I've sent a request for some legal advice on this situation regarding UK law, and I'll post back once I have a response.

In the mean time, while some may prefer the company of those the same age as them, which I think is perfectly reasonable (we do it in real life), what would you guys say to sub sections of the fleet which do have an age restriction?
As we all know, one of our primary goals in the {UFP} is to create a home for every type of respectable gamer, to create a welcoming environment where they can enjoy themselves. Just as we have created or are perhaps in the process of creating sub sections of STO for time zones and play styles, could age not also be a reason for sub sectioning?

[Sharpkiller]

I echo the opinions of others, outside of my legal stance. I don't believe an age restriction based on the prejudicial preconceptions of a certain age group is warranted in the fleet, nor is it part of our current philosophy. We have many mature younger members who are almost indistinguishable in terms of maturity from the older (and more "mature") members of the fleet. In some cases, some individuals will be more immature than someone who is younger than them. We've always operated under the philosophy of measuring a persons maturity, instead of profiling someone because of their age.

I don't see why this would need to change, outside of the legal concerns that I have raised. I strongly believe if there is a UK law similar to the United States' COPPA, then we have an obligation to comply with the law. It is highly improbable that this would ever be a concern, but if it does, we can clearly state that our policies comply with the law, and we would not willingly harbour someone under the designated age limit who does not have parental permission or whatever conditions such a law would impose.

[Veritas]

Again, as I said, I feel that ANY form of age discrimination in {UFP} is both a step in the wrong direction for the fleet and choice which will seriously encumber enjoyment of {UFP}. Unless we're discussing access to a forum with content only appropriate for those 18 and above, I see no reason to have any sort of age restricted group in {UFP} unless it pretains to length of membership (i. e. a 5-year-members' club or something).

[Telex Ferra]

That's not true at all. The law can;t apply to us if we don't know how young people are.

And besides, do you guys really want to kick out people like FWAH!!! ?

[John Hathaway]

No one is suggesting kicking anyone out. Let's keep this topic on course please.

[Neospectrum]

I think the main purpose of an age restriction would be to prevent us having to deal with immature kids. How often does the fleet encounter such disruptive members?

Perhaps younger members shoud have their maturity evaluated during an initial probationary period.

Is foul language a big problem for the fleet? On the boards it seems to be squeaky clean. In online games you can't really speak lewdly in public and amongst guild members, we're likely to be as polite as we are on here. The only time I really speak "freely" would probably be to a fellow guildmate over a direct/private chat. STO will also probably have filters in place like many other MMORPGS do.

I however don't at all feel like such a measure would be discriminatory but a form of protection. I agree with all the reasons for it but in my opinion it is not needed, at this time at least...

[Chris Wilkinson]

That's not true at all. The law can;t apply to us if we don't know how young people are.

Telex, the law applies all of the time and everywhere, just because we are on an online forum. Doesnt mean we can break the law. We are still responsible and have to obide by them