Oops, I got my 3s mixed up. I meant 3a https://www.lucidchart.com/documents/view/9a25eda5-f03d-46c0-80bf-756cd17da7c3
On Aug 26, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Jared Hirsch <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Ryan, > > Would you mind recapping what approach 3b is? I see an approach 3a earlier in > the thread, but must have missed the 3b discussion. > > Cheers, > > Jared > > On Aug 26, 2014, at 10:31 AM, Ryan Feeley <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Good news, just meeting with Urmika now and approach #3b is a go! Only >> detail is that we only allow birthyear choice once, so users will have to >> choose carefully. >> >> Ryan Feeley >> UX, Cloud Services >> Mozilla UX >> IRC: rfeeley >> >> On Aug 20, 2014, at 4:29 PM, Chris Karlof <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> As FxA expands to other services, it is probably good time to revisit this. >>> Here’s the current plan: >>> >>> 1) Ryan is going to talk with Mika on the legality of approach #3. >>> 2) After 1), we’ll explore implementation strategies on all our platforms. >>> >>> -chris >>> >>> On Aug 20, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Peter deHaan <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Clearly #1 is the best solution. >>>> >>>> Why? input type=date >>>> >>>> On my Flame and iPhone, it displays a handy spinner wheel which makes >>>> year/month/day input silly fast >>>> (http://www.w3schools.com/html/tryit.asp?filename=tryhtml5_input_type_date >>>> -- sadly w3schools was the only half decent docs i found with an example). >>>> I don't have my Nexus 4 handy to see how Android Chrome and Android >>>> Firefox currently treat that input type though. >>>> On the downside, desktop browser support is probably poor and i'm not sure >>>> how we could easily switch to some jQuery calendar solution or fall back >>>> to something else. http://caniuse.com/#feat=input-datetime >>>> >>>> -peter >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Karl Thiessen" <[email protected]> >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 7:58:20 AM >>>> Subject: Re: Improving age verification >>>> >>>> I think Greg puts it succinctly; I am quite firmly in this camp. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> --KT. >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Greg Norcie" <[email protected]> >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 2:15:51 PM >>>> Subject: Re: Improving age verification >>>> >>>> I don't know if anyone on this list had the dubious pleasure of being a >>>> tween under COPPA, but it was quite annoying. If I wanted to say, sign >>>> up for say, a Debian discussion forum, I had to lie about my age. I >>>> would be extremely unhappy if once I was finally 13, a service excluded >>>> me because it was "too much effort" to cover my edge case. I might even >>>> be annoyed enough to seek out another product. Isn't one of this year's >>>> goals to grow the Firefox userbase? >>>> >>>> Second, while 13 year olds might not be particularly passionate about >>>> Sync, what about other projects like Loop. I'll bet 13 year olds would >>>> be pretty annoyed if they couldn't sign up for the latest messaging app. >>>> >>>> I understand there's limited developer resources, but frankly, this >>>> seems like pretty minor fix. If the user is in the magic year, ask for a >>>> full birthdate. And we wouldn't even need to retain the data right? Just >>>> that the verification passed? So it's not like there is a privacy issue. >>>> I think we should think about the signal we are sending to the >>>> community if we leave this bug open. Do we want to tell an already >>>> disenfranchised group we don't care about them? >>>> -- >>>> Greg Norcie >>>> >>>> On 8/19/14, 1:20 PM, Edwin Wong wrote: >>>>> Sorry - I was quick to the punch there... That was in reference to >>>>> solution #3 or #3a. >>>>> >>>>> I think if we're going 'improve' age verification, we need to support the >>>>> exact dates for 13 year old. I'd choose the least amount of work >>>>> possible to support exact age verification but with no impact on users >>>>> over 13. >>>>> >>>>> -edwin >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Edwin Wong" <[email protected]> >>>>> To: "Nick Alexander" <[email protected]> >>>>> Cc: [email protected] >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 1:16:17 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: Improving age verification >>>>> >>>>> At first I thought the same... but the MM/DD/YYYY picker ONLY displays if >>>>> you pick the year that says you're 12 or 13. If you are over 13, you >>>>> will never see this date picker/form fields. >>>>> >>>>> -edwin >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Nick Alexander" <[email protected]> >>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>> 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: >>>>>> https://www.lucidchart.com/documents/view/9a25eda5-f03d-46c0-80bf-756cd17da7c3 >>>>>> >>>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> Nick >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Dev-fxacct mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Dev-fxacct mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Dev-fxacct mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Dev-fxacct mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Dev-fxacct mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Dev-fxacct mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Dev-fxacct mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dev-fxacct mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct >
_______________________________________________ Dev-fxacct mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct
