Meet new people in your area, absolutely privately using open-source technologies. You're only a few clicks away to find new friends, dating and sexual partners. Looking for a girlfriend, boyfriend, quick hookup, one-night stand or just someone with the same interests? No problem!
What does age have to do with being ethical? You think that 18 is magical unicorn gate that makes people adults? Or that if someone is younger shouldn’t be able to find sex/love partner? Or that no one lies online and forcing younger user to lie would benefit anyone, and not create situation when one lawfully adult person think that is meeting with another lawfully adult person to get drinks? Or that no 50 year old won’t create account with minimal age set up be it 18 or 16? I think lying is a problem here, not age difference.
Yall boycotting dating app because you are afraid that a 16 year old may have sex with maybe anyone more experienced making it probably safer? Especially when this site isn’t aiming to be hook up app, but place to meet people.
It is also very, very young project trying to do a great thing for lonely people, yet you attack it because you think that number is too low? And that’s only reason?
How sick can you be if the first thing you think about when you see young age is rape? (I assume that is what you think?) Or that 16 year old person must be removed and can’t think for themselves? You think when you hit 18, you got some magic smartness power card and become homo sapiens?
I don’t say nor think that being 18 makes you automatically an entirely developed person, However it gives you the status of an adult. Of course younger people should be able to find a love/sexual partner but the role of the society is to protect these younger people from possible danger. Yes, people lies online and we can’t really prevent that. Does that mean we should authorize anything to avoid getting people lying ? No. Probably that most of adult users would set the minimum age for research over 18. The thing is that we should not take a case-by-case approach to the protection of minors facing potential risk.
The problem is more than just a problem of sex, it is a problem of relationship with unequal status of people. The fact that it is a website for meeting people and not a dating website doesn’t change the issue.
I think it’s great to see an open-source and privacy minded project that tries to address the problem of loneliness (even more so in this time of covid). However, I can’t support a project that doesn’t try to prevent minors from being in a dangerous situation.
As I said before, sex (and therefore also sexual assaults) is a part of but not the whole of what is problematic here. Then trying to protect minors from potential danger does not mean taking away their free will or their ability to make their own choices.
I don’t think that banning people below 18 will enlarge their safety. It will just push them to different platforms (that aim to use their users). I don’t see any more danger if someone uses Instagram or similar than this site. The problem lies in education of user (which I think young people are better and better with that as they grow up with technology (I hope)), not in slider that goes too low of what you prefer.
You can meet and feel unsafe with person at any age.
Systems have huge impact on behaviour. If Alovoa will make educating campaigns, and push wholesome message it will make much bigger change than your solution, that doesn’t address the problem (of using position amd force for own gain, and damage to others).
I will try to use metaphor here. Let’s assume that there is a person and a match (besides other things). If you teach that person how to use this match, they will be able to warm themselves but not burn themselves down. They may hurt their fingertips trying to find how long they can hold it, but something like that you can just shake off. If you tie their hands but leave the match on the table and leave them, because of abrupt movements they may succeed in lighting it up (or get mad while trying to do that) but then fleemsy movements may lead to fire, and setting themselves ablaze. If you take that match from them, and leave the whole table still flooded in other matches, the result will be similar to above.
I really don’t like people thinking for others and assuming everything, and getting hostile because of that. The problem layes in education and teaching, not in freedom. Technology brings us tools. There is nothing wrong in knife while you are cutting carrot, but there is something horrible wrong if you stab somone with it on purpose. Still the problem isn’t in the act itself, but why that happend; what lead to that situation and how can it be prevented in the future.
I get and hear what you’re saying, however I do not agree with everything as I still believe in my previous statements.
Also I’m really not hostile, I gave my arguments respectfully. As for assuming “everything” we are both doing it, just not in the same way.
I see. I stan by my words also :)
Hostile, in like that you are not going to use it and posting comments about it being bad in some way. You are not neutral towards it, and not for it, so you are against it (I admit that binary thinking here isn’t 100% precise).