coan.net & TexasToest:

I'll try commenting to both your comments within the scope of this board being music related.

When I registered, my account had to be approved. So, I could not post music videos in here if I wasn't approved. This is the same as not allowing pawns to post. I have no greater ability as a non-member than I do as a member of the site. In fact, I have less capabilites as a non-member than being a member.

Nice try sugar coating subscriptions, but I am not buying it. Is this a game server or not? I would like to know my money if I subscribe goes to games, not videos.

Andersp:

This points out the stupidity in segregating the group and limiting features to members only. I understand Fencer wants subscribers, but subscriber limited features should be game related. You can tie a pretty red bow and try to offer me it for my computer, but I don't need a pretty red bow. What I want are game features. If you aren't willing to improve on the game features, I can't complain. However, what do you try to achieve by limiting this Youtube (the red bow) to subscribers only? That is no incentive to subscribe, TRY AGAIN.

This is one of my favorite guitarists:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/44-q_flFb-k"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param></embed></object>

TexasToest:

I found the part quoted earlier. You have to go to the TOS page which is linked within links LOL. If I, a 33 year old, is having trouble navigating to that area, I don't think a 8 or 9 old is going to consider reading the TOS or know where it's at.

The language is legally crafted rather vaguely. It's under a header "9. Ability to Accept Terms of Service", which brings the question if children aren't able to accept the terms, are they required to know they aren't able to accept the terms? If you get past that puzzle, you see they mention 18 years, and then say it's not "intended" for people under 13. What the heck does that mean? What happened to the 5 years in between?

They could have easily stated, "children under 13" are not allowed. However, they didn't. Furthermore, they request, "please", that the children go to another site. They don't come straight out and say, "children are not allowed".

TexasToest:

I don't see where it says kids under 13 shouldn't be there. At http://www.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines it says, "Also, be advised that we work closely with law enforcement and we report child exploitation."

So, if they are reporting child exploitation if and when it occurs, that would indicate logically that they allow children to make videos. Otherwise, they wouldn't be making that statement.

13 year olds not use Youtube? I have seen kids younger than that make videos over there LOL