Given the increasingly alarming trend of governments passing laws to force online age verification, and online services starting to include said enforcements in their ToS (e.g. Fluxer), I’m thinking we should be up to date with the state of affairs by adding a new case that indicates its inclusion in a service’s policies.
Checklist
With all being said, I wanted your feedback regarding the case’s specifics:
What rating should we give to it? Positive, Negative, or Blocker?
What weight shall be given to that case?
In what topic shall this belong to?
How will it be named?
What description should be given?
I’m not deeply invested in this issue, but I know a lot of people are worried about these measures and don’t have a good view of these. Hence why I’m asking for your input.
I get what you’re saying, but I believe our duty is to be as clear and concise to the end user as possible.
While us internally may be able to (somewhat) understand what each case implies, common users may not make the connection necessarily, nor should they be expected to. Therefore adding a case that explicitly relates to this is, in my opinion, in the users’ best interest.
Initially we could edit/extend the wording for any of such cases to include this topic, but that would certainly compromise the quality of many reviewed points with said cases.
I’m a firm believer that we should avoid having cases with optional wording (“and/or” or “with/without”, etc), and instead split them into separate cases. This is to avoid confusion.
Also we cannot (nor should) rely on users going out of their way to read a specific case’s description on Phoenix.
You and I know that people stick with first impressions (I’d argue this is in ToS;DR’s core philosophy).