Context: why I am asking this
Recently the network Acceptable Usage Policy was changed. As a result of those changes now it is technically possible to include what the policy defines as "Sexually Explicit Material" in a post if required provided that falls within a reasonable interpretation of a Network site’s scope and purpose.
During these arguments every now and then someone mentions that the age requirement for the network is technically 13 years old (16 in Europe). And most of the time someone steps in to point out that "13 years old is only the requirement for an account and it is only for data-process / GDPR related legal issues".
The actual question
The network TOS section about Age states that:
You must be at least 13 years old to access or use the Network or Services, including without limitation to complete a Stack Overflow account registration. By accessing or using the Services or the Network in any manner, you represent and warrant that you are at least 13 years of age. If you are under 13 years old, you may not, under any circumstances or for any reason, access or use the Services or Network in any manner, and may not provide any personal information to or on the Services or Network (including, for example, a name, address, telephone number or email address).
Emphasis mine. For sake of simplicity I removed the section about Europe.
Notice the wording: it says that you must be 13 years old to use the Network and that includes (but it is not limited to) registering an account. It also says that any use of the network is considered a warrant that you are at least 13 years old.
Let's forget the legal issues here (I don't know if a ToS would still be binding for anonymous users who browse the site) but the intent that I read in these words seems clear: You should be 13 years old even to be able to browse the site in the first place. Registering an account was never part of the requirement
While this may seem extreme, please remember that technically the site collects PII even for anonymous users (just think about ads) so it would not seem illogical to think someone put a "legal net" in place to prevent any issue.
My question is very simple: I just request the company to clarify if this interpretation is correct so that this misunderstanding can be cleared.
Note: before someone points out. Yes, I know that "no one knows you are a dog on the internet" and therefore there is no real way to block any younger user from using the site. I am just trying to see if legally speaking the network can claim that any user under 13/16 years old is in violation of the ToS.