Post by redonihunter in Taking a step back from Itch.io for some time. comments

Taking a step back from Itch.io for some time. » Comments

Viewing post in Taking a step back from Itch.io for some time. comments

Oh, the drama.

If you ignore someone you should ignore them. If they harrass you, report them, again and again, silently. They will lose their account. And if they come back, that one will be gone again. I saw it happen several times. Do not try to deal with such people yourself. They draw you down to their level and beat you with experience, as the saying goes ;-)

But I agree that itch is acting problematic, because either they allow someone stating they are in violation of the tos to post in the community or they allow someone impersonating a kid to post in the community, wich is another violation.

So no matter how you spin it, someone claiming to be 11 should not continue to have an account here, especially when misbehaving. At least no posting and publishing privileges.

The relevant portion is this

https://itch.io/docs/legal/terms#3-acceptable-use

Bullying, intimidating, harassing, defaming, threatening others, or violating the legal rights (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others;
Creating a false identity for the purpose or effect of misleading others;

And of course

Users affirm that they are over the age of 13, as the Service is not intended for children under 13.

And I am not sure, what law itch would be violating. It is their show, it does not matter much, if they "violate" their own tos. It is still their show. Is there a law that makes a tos a law?! Even if, where in the tos does it state, that itch has to enforce their restrictions? It is a contract between you and itch and not between you and other users. Also note, that it is written "intended" and not "forbidden". And furthermore this is tos to use itch, like publishing. Rules in community are on top, but basically, it is, be nice to each other. So use that report button, if someone violates that, and do not zeal out yourself. It makes one look bad and achives not the desired effect.

I wish all parties involved some calm and quiet. This is the internet, but you are all dealing with real people. Be nice. Think about what your mother would say to you, if she knew what you are doing, if in doubt.

DioShiba1 year ago(+2)(-1)

One more post before I sign off for a couple of weeks since I noticed this post.

You are correct in saying that I should just ignore them, though sometimes that's easier said than done. Even with my experience on the internet being a little over 15 years I will admit with some humility that I still have my own work to do on improving that in my own personal growth.

I agree with what you are saying that said.

On another note correct me if I am wrong but don't terms of service agreements generally apply as contracts that are covered by Consumer Protection Laws? Even if businesses are allowed to change their terms of service as needed I would assume then that they are still obligated to uphold their end of the ToS for the users who agree to use their service until that time comes where they have to change the clauses and conditions found in said contract for service.

That said a social media service shouldn't favor one user when all users agree to the same contract to be on here. EVEN THEN, I would assume that ToS still is one of the overarching contracts that should disclose what is allowed and disallowed that go above generalized rules. That's putting aside all the nuances in how problematic users and situations such as this one came to light.

At that point all users would have to be held to the same standard the service expects them to abide by and what the users expect the service upholds the conditions that were provided upon registration.

redonihunter1 year ago(-2)

Of course I am no lawyer. Not even an US citicen.

From my understanding, influenced by some european laws no less, if a company claims they do this and that in their tos and do not, a competitor could demand action from the law. Because they gain unfair advantage. But the hurt party would be the competitor. And strictly speaking, only if what they say in the tos is to be enforced. Like real legal stuff. Or if it can be construed as false adverstising. Stuff like claiming to be environment friendly and lying about it. It might be entirely different in the US. But since itch is not acting against you, how would consumer protection protect you from itch...

I see two points that might be relevant here. I did not study the tos too deeply. But first, I did not stumple upon any promise that they obligate themselves to enforce their tos. It is a contract setting up rules between the user and itch. Not between the user and other users. They set the rules how they say they might act, if you break rules. This is important because you buy stuff for money on itch. And you can earn money there. If money is involved, rules become very important for some reason. Also for people whining about their banned account, so they can be directed at the tos, what they did wrong and don't go running to consumer protection.

The second point is, that this age restriction is worded non strict. So this could imply, that they might refuse payments to and from an <13yo account holder, but otherwise keep a blind eye, as long as the account does not make age related problems. Like buying 18+ games. Or selling games without parental consent (wich is impossible to get before 13 anyways).

And I feel you with the easier said than done. I had my share of places I left because of strife before I got ... more patient.

But I disagree that itch is social media. They share some aspects and confuse some people with it. It is more classical forums. And the following stuff is catered to devs publishing stuff. You do not see my posts, if you would follow me - as you would on any real social media.