I recently signed up with Digg. The registration process was short and sweet. I simply provided a username, email address, password, my birthdate and I also verified that I was a “human” (their words, not mine) by entering the text I saw in the image verification box. All fields were required. Upon submitting my request, I almost immediately received an email which contained a link to activate my account. The activation worked without a hitch and I became a member in all of about 17 seconds. Done.
But wait.
Username. Email address. Password. Birthday. Human Verification. A favorite tune from Sesame Street comes to mind…
One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn’t belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others
By the time I finish my song?
Did you guess which thing was not like the others?
Did you guess which thing just doesn’t belong?
If you guessed this one is not like the others,
Then you’re absolutely…right!
That’s right. Digg is requiring, not just asking for, my birthdate. That’s unusual. Why do you suppose they request this info?
A few ideas came to mind:
- Digg collects demographical information on their members. This seems reasonable.
- Digg emails birthday cards to their members on their special day. This would be a very nice gesture but it’s unlikely.
- Digg checks and double-checks that you really are, as you say, human. It’s a cleverly disguised trick question. It’s like the bouncer asking you for your zip code or your sign when they suspect you are trying to sneak into their club with a fake id. All humans have birthdays so don’t leave this question blank!
There is some indication that Digg anticipated their request would get some attention. To their credit, they proactively provided some explanation.
We’ve got to ask for legal reason.
Digg is being a little vague, don’t you think? A 4-year-old asking “Where do babies come from?” might receive an answer in a similar tone. You know, a casual, nonchalant, let’s-change-the-subject-and-talk-about-more-comfortable-things- which-you-can-understand kind of answer. It’s an answer seemly made up of 1 part parental “because I said so”, 1 part childish “just because” and 1 part political “trust me.”
Truly, I think Digg would have been better served to give no explanation rather than offering up the legal reasons, umm, reason. If no explanation was provided, I would have been inclined to assume that one of my original guesses was accurate and I would have slept well tonight thinking that I’m so darn smart. I mean really. So what if Digg wants to know the glorious date I first entered the world? Big deal. Doesn’t everybody? ( Fine. It’s February 29th, 1966. I was expected to arrive in early January and I was supposed to be a girl. In turn, you might say that my parents have raised me to be a little skeptical and ask a lot of questions. Go figure.)
But since Digg served up a teaser of an answer, I’d like to know the whole story. They have really got me thinking now. After all, doesn’t a statement like this deserve further explanation? Shouldn’t the words “legal reasons” at least link to a page which outlines the details? I’m talking about my rights and I’m talking about Digg’s rights too. I want to know what I can do and what I can’t do. Most importantly, what is the penalty when I (I mean, if I) break the rules?
Digg understands this concept. Accompanying the “I agree to the Terms and Conditions for using Digg” checkbox, there’s a link to a page that thoroughly explains (you guessed it) the Terms and Conditions for using Digg. Similarly, when I buy something online, there’s typically a link to a page which respectfully explains what a credit card verification code is and why it is needed. And when one buys discounted pharmaceuticals from Mexico, isn’t there always a link to a page which highlights
the potential side-effects? The bottom line is that “legal reasons” should come along with more documentation. Sure, the majority of humans (assuming again that you are human) can’t interpret legal mumbo jumbo, but it’s always reassuring to know it’s available and it is nice to at least pretend we understand the content.
So throw us a bone, Digg. Tell us more and give us (notice I’m dragging everyone into this now) some piece of mind and the opportunity to act smarter than we most likely are.
Rest assured, I have looked into Digg’s Terms of Use. I have read through the FAQs and I’ve done a few Google searches on the subject, but I’m still in the dark. At the risk of sounding like a whiny two-year-old, I ask again, “Why does Digg require my birthdate?” More specifically, what are the “legal reasons?”
Help me out. Why do you think Digg needs to know my birthdate?
As you may have deduced, this article was written in jest. I truly would like to get my question answered, but I want to stress that Digg is clearly very well-respected and I am innocently having a little fun with them here. Digg has simply fallen victim to my lazy Saturday afternoon.
To join Digg, go here. Sorry. If you haven’t been born yet, you’re just going to have to wait. I’m sure it isn’t because Digg wishes to alienate. In the easiest to understand terms, it’s for “legal reasons.”
Legally, don’t you need to be over 13 or something to give all those details (or do some other digg action?) Maybe it’s for age?
Sure. That’s a possibility. Of course, one could submit a birthdate with the year 2006 per the provided dropdowns on the form.
Why does it also ask for the username and password for your Blog in profile settings? I am still not sure what happens with your blog info once you enter it, so I didn’t. (Possibly for the “single-click blog posting?!?)
I haven’t used that feature, but I assume it is the only way Digg can verify the blog you are associating with YOUR profile is really your own. Technorati uses the same technique. Though it fair to question these requests, on trusted sites it is reasonable to share the information for one-time validation of ownership. At least, that’s my opinion.
Thank you a lot for sharing this with all folks you really realize what you are talking approximately! Bookmarked. Please additionally discuss with my website =). We can have a link change arrangement between us!
This is an intelligently written article… I just shared this on Delicious.
I want to to thank you for this excellent read!! I absolutely enjoyed every bit of it. I have got you book-marked to look at new stuff you post…
Hello my family member! I wish to say that this post is amazing, great written and include almost all vital infos. I¡¦d like to see extra posts like this .
I like this website very much, Its a rattling nice situation to read and find info. “Life becomes harder for us when we live for others, but it also becomes richer and happier.” by Albert Schweitzer.
thats the whole point of weekly world news is to make up stories. gtfo.
Nothing counter -productive at all; generally these classic works are classic because they pioneer a particular plot device or exemplify a genera,things that are important to literature. At the quite least they can teach focus. It’s really effortless for anyone to focus on what they like, but to focus on something you discover even mildly displeasing requires a measure of discipline which will serve anyone well in any endeavor. There is nothing useful in reading-as-such, rather, the benefit (outside of any personal enjoyment) comes in comprehension and the concentration of ones faculties.