Improving age verification
jbonacci at mozilla.com
Tue Aug 19 10:54:41 PDT 2014
I agree with Nick and would probably choose #2 minus the Date.
We don't really need it and we can avoid the domestic/intl date format stuff that people are so used to
MM/DD/YYYY vs. DD/MM/YYYY
reduced to just MM and YYYY
I would hate to have to do all that typing for #1 on my mobile devices.
And, again, we would really have to tweak the UI to except both formats above.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Alexander" <nalexander at mozilla.com>
To: dev-fxacct at mozilla.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 10:34:10 AM
Subject: Re: Improving age verification
On 2014-08-19, 10:25 AM, Ryan Feeley wrote:
> Hi all,
> Currently our sign-up form makes users feel older (born 1990 or earlier?), and excludes some kids born in the magic year: https://accounts.firefox.com/signup
> Finally… here are three proposals to improve our age verification:
> Remember that The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA) is a United States federal law that requires that we use a “neutral" age verification mechanism.
> I believe option #1 and #2 are neutral, but I’ll require legal input for #3.
> Which do you prefer: #1, #2, #3, #3a or leave it the same?
Entering YMD (#1) on mobile is out of the question. Unbelievably
terrible with keyboards, Swype, auto-complete, etc.
I could be convinced that #2 without the day field (what do we care?
round!) is worth it. But maybe we just go for a larger year range.
#3 is a lot of effort for a really small win. In general, my political
features are not unduly ruffled by denying folks in the cusp year access.
Dev-fxacct mailing list
Dev-fxacct at mozilla.org
More information about the Dev-fxacct