Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Plentyoffish Site/Suggestions/Help  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 califgirl66
Joined: 7/3/2011
Msg: 492
New Age Restrictions Set By Admin: Message Restrictions Page 17 of 33    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33)
I am so not happy about this age restriction thing at all. I am not interested or attracted to men younger than me or near my age. I prefer an older man. I was starting contact with someone not long ago, we had much in common and now I can not contact him. This is seriously not fair. If we are over 18 we should have the right to choose who we want to be with. I could go on but I will not. Let us make our own choices in age, race, income.
 Kaos33
Joined: 7/16/2011
Msg: 494
view profile
History
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/28/2013 8:51:33 PM
Mr. Marcus Bloomberg, just because you deem it improper for a woman that is 45 to have a relationship with a 30 year old man, this is still America, and the last I checked, people are still free to associate with whoever they want. I happen to agree with you that a 45 year old woman, in the long term, cannot have a successful relationship with a 28 year old man, (but I don't not agree that a man cannot have a successful relationship with a woman 15 years his juinor because woman genarally are much more mature than men), but dude,who the hell are you to tell them they cannot at least try?! They have the right as Americans to at least try!

Mr moderator, this is not a petition. First, your site administrators conveniently removed the forum link from the general site, thus making it much more difficult for the POF population, especially the older polpulation to find the forum. Second, as has been pointed out, these little young girls who complain, can set the age restrictions on their profiles so they don't get message from older men or women. This should be the simplist solution being as these little young girls spend 12-14 hours per day on their smart phones anyway! Instead, they spend an inordinate amount of time contacting Marcus with complaints when, if they would have set the restrictions to begin with, they would not have been contacted!!!! Second, they can select the block feature. Can you say BLOCK any user you find offensive?! When are liberals going to require people to accept responsibility and protect themselves? (I know I am asking too much from the liberal mindset to ask people to accept personal resonsibility to protect themselves. Apparently, liberals think that someone else is responsible for protecting them...tell that to a woman that is raped in a gun-free zone that has a concealed carry permit). Mr. Marcus Bloomberg is trying to run a Nanny state site...what an idiot...does he not realize that this is America?! The liars and cheats will go underground. They will delete profiles and come back and lie about their age. They will couch the sexy messages in"smooth terms." Mr. moderator, all the behavior that Mr. bloomberg seeks to stop will not stop. (Although I do find it pretty hypocrytical to see adds for Russian sex kittens, older women seek younger men etc. when Mr. Marcus says it is unacceptable and inappropriate here. Apparently, he is profiting off of the very behavior he seeks to quash on POF...seems he seeks to steer it to sex sites and cougar sites etc. Man, what a hypocrite! Marcus criticized men "dressed as women" but has advertising for gay and lesbian sites. You can't have it both ways! Eventually those who hide behind lies and deceit will fall!)

Third, who is going to pretect me from all the women that are obese on this site? Who is going to protect me from the obese women outside my race preferences?! Why don't you guys send out restrictions against certain weight people from contacting other weight people? Why don't you prohibit inter-racial dating, as many, if not the majority, find it offensive. I am being intentionally extreme here to make an obvious point. My point, where does Mr. Marcus Bloomberg stop with all this nonsense and just let people date and talk to who they want?!

Recommendations:

1. Make people select age ranges from contact.
2. Do away with catagories such as married, intimate encounters, friends etc. that do not promote relationships. (Although be aware that you will push people into being untruthful).
 txtmel8tr
Joined: 10/17/2010
Msg: 495
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 12:53:50 AM
Others have already spoken quite eloquently regarding this new age restriction policy but I would like to chime in and say that no one has the right to dictate to whom you are allowed communicate with provided that both parties are adults. I barely come on this site anymore, for a lot of reasons, but this latest policy change really made me stand up and take notice and I felt compelled to comment. For this sites sake I hope they reconsider because it's only going to drive people to the other sites or more likely just encourage even honest people to lie about their age.
 Debyduz_
Joined: 5/4/2012
Msg: 497
New Age Restrictions Set By Admin: Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 4:35:03 AM
My thoughts on the new age restriction.

I realize that wading through all the lame "hi" conversations and perverts can be a pain, but I am not feeling the benefit form the new age limits. I have always let my age filter off even though I have been contacted by some guys that way too young or old. I have had better conversations with younger men then those that are near my age.

In case you don't know Marcus perverted men and women exist at all age levels. You did not stop them all you did was force them to pic on people closer to their age and to be careful how they word their messages.

I answer almost all messages even the pigs. I will have a conversation with anyone. I don't think anyone will buy a membership when they find out they can't talk to a certain group of people. In case you didn't know with all the men writing hundreds of woman and getting zero messages, the "people who are most likely to respond" are the ones driving this site and the advertising dollars and we know that is the bulk of the profits. If guys don't get answers they are going to leave because you know how short their attention span can be. Since men are the ones mostly likely to pay for member you might want to reconsider the restriction.

Currently I have 'favorited' a man who is quite younger because his picture is familiar. He returned the 'favorite,' but I can't even say hi to him.

Also you need to quit blaming features on it can't be done. It is a database and it is code. If you can require one field you an require people to pick an age group.

I realize you are trying to drive the site towards getting more dates, but simple friendships promote introductions to friends or even develop into more. You never know where a simple comment about a profile or forum post will lead. People have to be open to finding love and closing doors on them is not going to help reach their goal.

I have tried many dating sites. POF is by far the site with the best free services. By making the services free of course their will be more dates. As much as you try you will never stop the pervs they will just save it for the dates. I prefer finding out about them prior to meeting. Please reconsider the age restriction and encourage people to use the filters that are in place instead of imposing restrictions.

I realize that it is your site and you own it, but you might want to read up on the success of dictatorships. Ruling a site that way doesn't create an environment that promotes love.
 Ed Bear
Joined: 5/19/2007
Msg: 498
view profile
History
New Age Restrictions Set By Admin: Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 5:44:51 AM
In terms of people not wanting to be "bothered" by people they don't like - age, height, income, gender, or whatever they can filter by themselves...

I will provide an example of how being unwanted is not being culpable. You have to be unwanted, persistent, frightening, threatening, rude or abusive.

The judge in the Bill Clinton/Paula Jones trial eventually, in her decision, ruled that EVEN IF CLINTON HAD DONE EVERYTHING JONES ACCUSED HIM OF, she could not find him guilty of any crime. Explicitly. "you can't blame him for trying," as long as he took no for an answer.

I'm not sure exactly whether the judge concluded he had or had not exposed himself, but that would certainly have been a crime with or without any intent or conversation, so she probably did not find a clear accusation of that in the testimony submitted to the court. (As opposed to what may have appeared in the press or the mouths of other persons.)

"You men brought it on yourselves?" Collective guilt. No, a bunch of a-holes and an ideologue brought it on us all.
ED BEAR
 BabblingBrookes
Joined: 2/14/2013
Msg: 499
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 7:28:46 AM

i will also add that i am in the united kingdom and that american law does not apply to me as i do not live in america.


I have to point out that POF is NOT headquartered in America. It's headquartered in Vancouver, Canada. Yes, Canada is a part of the North American continent, but "America" typically means the U.S. POF is a Canadian company.

As for the restrictions, well it's a Private company. You're free to go if you wish. It's not forcing you to do anything.
 Rocketshipsarego
Joined: 5/30/2012
Msg: 500
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 8:26:49 AM
I'm not a fan either. I was chatting with a woman who was 48, and things were going along great, We were chatting for a while and things were going great. She's amazing, and now I find out about the age restriction thing and I find out she's not a member anymore. Not everyone is on here for a hookup
 BabblingBrookes
Joined: 2/14/2013
Msg: 502
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 9:30:10 AM
since we only have p.o.f in the uk as the only free reputable dating site. then , we are being forced those of us that have a limited income to use this . as just about every single person in the united kingdom uses plenty of fish.


Forced? You could FREELY walk outside and meet people there. You're not OWED a relationship. I must have missed that memo when I was born: "All humans are owed a relationship and a Ferrari by virtue of being born. Enjoy!" I don't know, maybe free will works differently over there. *sarcasm intended*

Oh stop it, you are not being insulted. Honestly, if what I've said is an insult to you when it had NOTHING to do with you personally, then you have a skewed view of your place in reality. Good luck to you.

Granted, I don't know the consumer laws in your country, but I assume you have to BE a consumer for them to be relevant. I'm not paying for any services, but who knows? Maybe the term "consumer" means something different in the legislature you're referencing. *shrug*

On topic: Having a grievance in regards to the site's restrictions is perfectly valid. It's ageist. Many people find "isms" distasteful. Nonetheless, it is a private company and is not paid for through tax dollars. The owner is free to adjust the settings of their personal website as they see fit. Since we're not paying for the privilege to be here, we are not owed anything. The only ones OWED anything are those who have paid for the upgraded features. They will receive fewer emails due to these new restrictions and should be compensated accordingly. Either by removal of the restrictions, or their money back. Granted, I never tried to upgrade so I don't know what they clicked when they paid for the service. Perhaps there is a disclaimer that their membership can be adjusted at anytime. I personally don't know.



I think like me, you also missed the memo that all people are owed a membership here too. I am surprised at how many people here with free accounts feel they are owed services from POF.

Food for thought.
In regards to upgraded members being owed something, another point of view is that they are still receiving the added features a paid membership gives you. In regards to having less contacts, to be clear, I think the claim of getting more emails with an upgraded membership is in comparison to users WITHOUT an upgraded membership. So although their total contacts might be reduced with these new changes, EVERYONE'S HAS and in comparison to a freebie account the enhancements still should be increasing their contacts.

 BabblingBrookes
Joined: 2/14/2013
Msg: 504
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 11:03:55 AM
I will politely back out since I don't know the restrictions and laws of your country. Good luck to you.
 MidnightDreamweaver
Joined: 3/20/2013
Msg: 508
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 1:43:58 PM
Sheezus, not that difficult, just make another profile that fits the age, range, location, whatever the parameters are of the person you want to contact, in other words, LIE!!!

The end justifies the means.



Thank you for posting this.
It was an easy red flag for me to look up and see you are violating the rules with your multiple profiles.

Fair warning to everyone else.
Those making multiple profiles or creating new ones to get around the age range
WILL BE BANNED and may have ALL their profiles deleted.


 Aristotle_Amadopolis
Joined: 12/8/2011
Msg: 509
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 2:15:11 PM
Sheezus, not that difficult, just make another profile that fits the age, range, location, whatever the parameters are of the person you want to contact, in other words, LIE!!!

Great idea and when people start filling out the feedback now attached to messages and indicate that you profile is a lie it will be deleted and good chance you will be banned.

Thus proving that the owner idea will be able to weed out the people that are not honest.



Agreed.
1/2 way done
rest to be completed tomorrow


 riuser
Joined: 8/31/2010
Msg: 510
view profile
History
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 3:13:15 PM
The reality is that those that were causing the problem (and for whom this change was intended) will be the ones that do this (lie). The rest (honest) people will abide by the rules and be potentially harmed by it. Rules mainly govern the honest. Therefore you will have more profiles and more dishonest profiles. It will just take a little time but the reality is that this will not do anything. The unscrupulous will just see this as a benefit - it will weed out their competition.

I do not really think that this was well thought out.
 import_from_UK
Joined: 3/20/2013
Msg: 511
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 3:17:33 PM

check the united kingdom SALES OF GOODS AND SERVICES ACT


Not that UK laws apply to a Canadian site but the Sales of Goods and Services Act you are quoting protects buyers in the matter of a breach of sale contract. YOU aren't a buyer, you are a user but even if you were an upgraded member, the contract would be the terms of service you agreed to, when you voluntarily created an account here. I suggest you go and read them because it clearly states that POF have the right to make any changes they wish, as and when they see fit.


PROVIDING they dont BREACH any INTERNATIONAL COUNTRY LAWS and in this case they have private company or not IT IS STILL PROVIDING A SERVICE TO THE BRITISH PUBLIC and BREACHING OUR BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS


This is complete rubbish!

A website is governed by the laws of the country that the site is based in, NOT all it provides a service too. No international laws have been breached. You referred to the legal age for sexual content in your prior post but POF isn't stopping you from seeking out minors to have sex with, it's merely stopping you from doing it here. I didn't see you ranting before this change that those legally able to consent in the UK who are aged between 16 and 18 were being excluded from the site due to the min. age requirement of 18 for POF membership.

POF is not here to provide a service to the UK public - it's allowing the UK public to use the service it provides. Big difference. And basic human rights - don't make me laugh.
 LaidBackInPG
Joined: 2/4/2013
Msg: 512
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 3:20:43 PM
This is ridiculous. Plain and simple. My parents are 12 years apart, only 2 years from not being allowed to communicate via POF had this been available in 1984. Their relationship was borderline creepy according to POF. I was the product of a marriage between a 33 year-0ld man and a 21 year-old woman. I was not the product of a condom breaking during a one-night stand.

The other part of this that raises my eyebrows is that not every person on POF is here to find a relationship or a hookup. There are options on everyone's profile to look for "hangout" or "friends" and a lot of users are vocal in their profiles and on the forums stating just that. If Markus wants intimate encounters to go and to restrict communication based on age because he doesn't want anyone using POF to find a one-night stand or a friend with benefits because he intended this site to be for only real relationships, he needs to get rid of users who are looking for friends and hangouts as well.

Skimming through this thread, Markus says that there were 55,000 messages sent to his admin account supporting this change within 3 hours of the mass email he sent, and not a single woman has voiced displeasure. Does he really think we are that stupid? That claim is not worth responding to aside from asking if he really thinks we are that stupid.

The only other thing I will mention is that one of my best friends in this world is a woman who is 15 years older than me. We're not sexual with each other, we are not in a relationship, but we have helped each other in life quite a bit. According to POF, that's nothing positive.
 kalleea
Joined: 9/4/2011
Msg: 513
New Age Restrictions Set By Admin: Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 3:28:24 PM

IS STILL PROVIDING A SERVICE TO THE BRITISH PUBLIC and BREACHING OUR BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS


Every single person on POF AGREED to the Terms of Service before being
allowed to enter the site. When you clicked the I AGREE button, you
agreed to: http://www.pof.com/terms.aspx

This is a part of POF Terms of Service you may have overlooked:


RIGHT TO USE
Your right to use the Service is subject to any limitations, conditions and restrictions established by us from time to time, in our sole discretion. We may alter, suspend or discontinue any aspect of the Service at any time, including the availability of any Service feature, database or content. We may also impose limits on certain features and aspects of the Service or restrict your access to parts or all of the Service without notice or liability and for any reason.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 514
New Age Restrictions Set By Admin: Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 4:35:42 PM

Markus says that there were 55,000 messages sent to his admin account supporting this change within 3 hours of the mass email he sent, and not a single woman has voiced displeasure.

One has now.
Seriously-is this going to be applied equally to all PoF users?
I won't go into a lot of detail but I have some evidence that it is not applied equally,
Personally- one has to be 18 or older to legally join PoF,right? Are our young lady members incapable of clicking "delete" and "block" if they don't like a message they receive? Look, probably 98% of men who sign up to any dating site are looking for someone to have sex with, eventually. If young women find this shocking, that a man 18 yrs her senior contacts her, perhaps online dating is not for them?
Going by the forums, it seems like MANY males of all ages are quite disillusioned (and maybe even thoroughly pissed!) that NOBODY responds to their emails...or does this messaging age restriction only apply to older males messaging younger females?
Cindy O
 TheWindingRoad
Joined: 5/3/2013
Msg: 516
New Age Restrictions Set By Admin: Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 8:34:31 PM
I doubt he is listening, he already made his money. This is what happens to the ultra wealthy, they start dictating to the masses...the same ones that made them wealthy, ironic isn't it?

Markus Frind is a Canadian businessman with a net worth of $200 million. Markus Frind gained his net worth by being the founder and CEO of Plentyoffish Media Inc., which is an online dating site headquartered in Vancouver, Canada.
 ImpassionedAdventure
Joined: 9/22/2012
Msg: 517
New Age Restrictions Set By Admin: Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 8:49:58 PM
I took the time and read through most of the posts.

For all of you that claim your international contract lawyers siding with POF I had a good laugh. Apparently Microsoft and Google to name two companies apparently slipped through your news browser over the last 15 years. The EU has gotten substantial fines over there terms of use policies.

On the topic at hand I have to say I am disappointment and all site my own personal experience on POF. When I first joined I kept my search option to 10 years younger, and four years older then my current age. The women that I met who fit my profile search requirements generally have kids over 18 and are not interested in a father with a 12/13 year old. There done raising kids. Also I am a very active person and finding women that enjoy the same active intersts as me is pretty hard. I still Surf, Ski, back pack, mountain bike, etc... What I found is woman in the 35-45 range that have kids my own age were still very active and enjoy the same activities as my daughter and I. I also found that this age group was more interested in dating older men with kids because they tend to be more stable then men in there own age group. Just my two cents
 WilliamofBaskerville
Joined: 4/9/2009
Msg: 518
view profile
History
New Age Restrictions Set By Admin: Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 8:54:33 PM
I am going to come at this from a different perspective, that of an admin. I've had the experience and dealt with people harassing others and so forth and so on. One thing I find that doesn't work well is imposing one's own idea of what is socially right and wrong. Yes, it's your property. You may do as you wish. I often used the same line when I had to make changes, but one thing I did not do was impose my ideas of what was right and wrong.

What I ran had nothing to do with dating or sex, but there were people involved so guess what happened anyway? Dating and sex. Part of running something where people interact socially is being clever to sort out problems without imposing on the people who aren't a problem. The previous solution of people being able to block out ages on their own was perfect. The imposition of it is simply boneheaded IMO. This isn't just my personal opinion, it's my experience. 22 years of it. Yes, it predates the world wide web*. If there was still a big problem a simple solution would be to automatically set the age boundaries in the code such that a user had to choose to remove them. Or force users to set or not set them. It's about being creative but not restrictive or imposing. There's my free advice.

As far as the restrictions go on my use of POF, This change doesn't really have any meaningful effect on me. I don't like it, but at the same time it is not going to make POF any more useless to me than it has been ;).

*part of the old internet where we didn't get rich or even minimum wage :)
 Nimbus_storm
Joined: 4/1/2013
Msg: 519
view profile
History
New Age Restrictions Set By Admin: Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 9:05:45 PM
I have to say this new rule is pretty ridiculous and demeaning. Plenty of Fish has no business telling who should contact who regardless of age range, period. Someone who's 18 has the right to go out with whoever they want, whatever age they want, and if they don't want to reply to that person they don't have to and can block them.

The idea they made this a rule, is frankly disgusting. It says that people don't have the good judgement to decide whether or not they should be able to date someone who's within a 14 year age range, that they're not smart enough to use good judgement.

Since when has POF become my parents? And if people don't listen to their parents when they're young, imagine how they're gonna feel now. Shame on you POF, this is a new low.
 marcerickson1
Joined: 9/7/2011
Msg: 520
view profile
History
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 10:10:08 PM


I love how we are all still just ignoring the fact that this blatantly violates our freedom of speech and the fact that it discriminates based on age. Both of which are actually illegal.



You really need an education. Your freedom of speech only applies to the government and not to privately owned property.... which POF is.


The charter does not restrict age discrimination based on whether or not it is a public place. It's in the constitution (the highest law in the land) and the wording is unequivocal:

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-15.html#h-45

FURTHERMORE, there's an extremely good argument that POF is akin to a public place - since all members of the public are invited and are only banned if they cause problems.
 TheWindingRoad
Joined: 5/3/2013
Msg: 521
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/29/2013 10:31:11 PM
If POF thinks that they are immune from US laws they better think about it again....not only are there Federal laws but state & local laws as well. This goes for the other countries they operate in too. The USA is particularly fertile ground because of the sheer volume of lawyers that would have no problem going after a company with deep pockets. Counsel for POF could easily be answering to motions filed in all 50 states in addition to other jurisdictions. I could imagine a class action lawsuit as well, they have real exposure here.
 marcerickson1
Joined: 9/7/2011
Msg: 522
view profile
History
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/30/2013 12:04:28 AM

if you are are looking for women the youngest you can search for is your age -14 this rule is only in effect if you search for women under 35. Women 18 to 21 can only be contacted by men under 30. (not fully implemented yet)

Women who are 18 come to the site to find people to date, they don't come here to find "friends" with men in their 50's. Over all for young women its just a horrible user experience as for some of them over half their messages are from men double their age. This change only effects 1.7% of first contacts between users on the site but it will make a huge difference in terms of female perception of the site.

This is - to put it bluntly - bullshit. Who are you to impose your prejudices on and determine what is appropriate for me? On different sites (not at POF), I am in long term conversations with women who are 31, 26, and 21 - I'm 56. In person I am dating a lady who is 43. I have a female friend who is 23 and who ONLY dates men older than forty.

The tools already exist on your site to solve your so-called "problem". Age restrictions are able to be set by anyone - if that's not good enough, have everyone who creates a profile specify an age range like you now require other fields to be completed when a profile is set up. And even non-programmer me knows it's trivial to write a script that will pull out the female profiles by age - a mass message can then be sent to them stating they must set an age range on their profile.

This policy is going to cause the creation of many sock puppet accounts and many more men will lie about their age - and ladies will complain about the lying men. Is that what you want?

This is age discrimination and sexist. Are you aware that this could be against Section 15 of the Constitution Act of 1982 - better known as the Canadian Charter of Rights?
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-15.html#h-45

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.


Are you going to start discriminating against site users for their sex next? For their sexual orientation? This implementation is bad and is the reason you are getting so much pushback in the Forum thread on it. I urge you to implement the changes above that many other members have also suggested in this thread:
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts16028207.aspx

And the changes suggested by Ezme75 on the page below in his post starting "I am a website developer and deal with issues like this all the time....":
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/16028207datingPostpage5.aspx
 marcerickson1
Joined: 9/7/2011
Msg: 523
view profile
History
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/30/2013 12:13:06 AM
Oh and I forgot the 38 year old in England I've been conversing with since December last year.
 Aristotle_Amadopolis
Joined: 12/8/2011
Msg: 524
Message Restrictions
Posted: 5/30/2013 6:13:52 AM

This policy is going to cause the creation of many sock puppet accounts and many more men will lie about their age - and ladies will complain about the lying men. Is that what you want?

and as previously noted, when they do, the ladies will report them via the new reporting tool and poof their accounts will be nuked and they will no longer be on POF.



For the internet lawyers out there:

To make a claim that ones Charter right where violated you would have to show that a promise has been broken.

As POF create a duty or obligation with respect to their service and when you read the TOS you would learn that POF reserves the right to change or modify that promise of service at any time and anyone that has a profile here has already agreed to those terms.

Then you also have this:

Application of the Charter

Section 32 (Scope of Application) states that the Charter only applies to governments, and, as a result, not directly to private individuals, businesses, or other organizations. In other words, under the Charter, only federal and provincial governments (and, in turn, territorial and local governments) are legally obligated to respect its constitutional rights andĀ freedoms.
Show ALL Forums  > Plentyoffish Site/Suggestions/Help  >