Views on kids younger then 13 years old revealing their age on Social Networks?

froggyboy604

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Manager
Full GL Member
28,530
2007
748
Awards
20
Credits
8,627
Mature Board Viewing
Unlock full profile styling
I think it is not a good idea for kids to reveal their real age on social websites like Facebook, YouTube, Snapchat, and Instagram since they can meet some criminals who try to take advantage of kids.

I heard of a few news stories of criminals taking advantage of kids who they met online.

Underaged kids are also breaking the age-restriction rule for YouTube, Facebook, etc which require kids to be 13 and over to join, and require their parent's permission sometimes.

A lot of content on social networking sites like Instagram and Facebook are not for members who are under 13, so some kids may not be mature enough to view or understand the content like pro wrestling videos which are meant for older teens, and young adults according to the TV and video game ratting systems.
 
Never been a fan of children below the age of 13 or even at 13 years and above revealing their age on social media. It's already a dangerous world on the internet for anyone let alone children and telling them your age only makes things worse.
 
If you got to reveal your age then I don't think you should be using the webpage really. It can be dangerous if you mess around with that kind of info.
 
Doesn't Facebook have a COPPA age limit or something like that to prohibit people under 13 to sign up?
 
Doesn't Facebook have a COPPA age limit or something like that to prohibit people under 13 to sign up?

Yes, Facebook does have a COPPA, but young kinds who are under 13 can lie and say they are 18 or over, so they can access more adult-oriented content on Facebook. There maybe some Facebook games, pages, and groups which are intended for adults who are over 18 because they talk about alcohol, drugs, mature movies, and some violence.

Some kids may have their parents' permission to join, and their parents can contact Facebook to say they have permission to be on Facebook.

Parent's can use their Facebook account to control their kid's Facebook account friend requests and their kids' access to third-party applications and games.
 
I still remember the days when you were told not to reveal ANY information about yourselvs online. No age, no name, no address, no phone number... the assumption was that anyone could be anyone online and you weren't to trust them at all.

Kids nowadays (like these under 13 year olds revealing everything about themselves online) are being stupid as hell.
 
I don't exactly know how it works, but if they state their real age on Facebook and have lied about it when they created their accounts, you can report it and Facebook will just ban their accounts or delete them.
 
I still remember the days when you were told not to reveal ANY information about yourselvs online. No age, no name, no address, no phone number... the assumption was that anyone could be anyone online and you weren't to trust them at all.

Kids nowadays (like these under 13 year olds revealing everything about themselves online) are being stupid as hell.

I also remember those days as well where the local News told people not to reveal any information about yourself, and not trust anyone you don't know in real life.

I don't exactly know how it works, but if they state their real age on Facebook and have lied about it when they created their accounts, you can report it and Facebook will just ban their accounts or delete them.

Some Facebook members have been banned for being underage. But, they will just make another account with another e-mail address.
 
Doesn't Facebook IP ban too?

I think IP ban may prevent adult family member like parents, grand parents, uncles, and aunts from joining or using Facebook. A lot of people use Facebook on the same internet connection, PC user account, and computer. I think banning previously used usernames used by underage Facebook members, and their e-mail, and cell phone number is the only way to ban underage users without parental permission from using Facebook.

Facebook may just lock out children account until kid's have parental permission when their parent's phone, fax, or e-mail Facebook a consent form that their kid have permission to use Facebook.

Facebook most likely can find out who the I.P. address belongs to, and make a phone call to the kid's parents, or contact parents on Facebook if they are Facebook members which use the same I.P. and tell the parents that their kids are revealing their age, location, and other personal information to strangers.

A lot of people who live in more restrictive countries in the Middle East, and parts of Asia sometimes use Facebook with Tor, VPN, Proxy servers, and private browsers which hide their I.P., so they can share posts with Facebook and Twitter members and the news that they are being mistreated by the government, so Facebook may be less likely to ban I.P., so people can post about their country's problems.
 
Oh, I see your point. I guess IP bans are only a thing on forums and blogs, not on social networks.
 
Oh, I see your point. I guess IP bans are only a thing on forums and blogs, not on social networks.

I feel forums can end up banning a lot of real visitors who maybe interested in joining your forum if the forum ban many I.P. a day. A lot of people may use the same internet connection especially if it is a school, apartment, and work internet connection. Unfortunately, some users on the connection choose to become trolls or spammers.

I think I.P. bans maybe less common on blogs since many blogs require manual approval of comments from staff members, or there are moderators who remove troll and spam comments once someone reports it, and they see bad replies.

Very popular blogs, and forums may not use I.P. bans because there is a greater possibility that they block out many readers who uses the same I.P. as the spammer and trolls. There is always a possibility that the reader's friend, son, father, mother, brother, and sister are spammers, and trolls who uses the same connection as them.
 
Last edited:
Well, I think social networks probably do IP ban, though it's mostly saved for users doing something outright illegal (terrorism related offences, illegal porn, etc) or actively trying to hack/take down the site (like say, through a DDOS attack). Bots too, assuming they exist just to post spam/get sold for money.

But IP banning for most users... yeah, I suspect that's gotten rarer in recent years.
 
I think social networks may earn less money by I.P. banning many users since a lot of ads still pay a small amount of money for pageviews even when no one clicks on the ads. Social networks may ban troll and spam account, but trolls and spammers can still view publicly shared content with ads like YouTube videos which contain ads, or Facebook content with ads in the sidebar. They can also use different names and e-mails to make new accounts.

But, DDoS and non-human visitors like spambots are most likely IP ban unless the site is untrustworthy, and also count DDoS and bot pageviews for generating money from ads.
 
Children ages 13 and younger cannot use most social media. Their parents should control what they're accessing, they can watch videos or play some simple games, but social networks aren't meant for them. The older they are accessing them, the better.
 
Back
Top