Surface TOS + privacy policy better

[YoshiRulz]

Untested.

I'd also like to suggest these changes to /SiteRules:

+As the stewards of this platform, staff and contributors also have rules to follow:
+the [Staff/Conduct|staff code of conduct], the [System/PrivacyPolicy|Privacy Policy], and the [https://github.com/TASVideos/tasvideos/blob/main/LICENSE|server software's license].
 
 !! Legal issues
 
 Users are __strictly prohibited from posting references to copyrighted material (such as ROM or BIOS images) or asking for such__. Any such posting will be deleted.
-
 Screenshots and AVI recordings are considered fair use and are fully allowed.
+
+To upload content such as movies and scripts, users will need to release it under [SiteLicense|CC BY 2.0].

And this change to /System/PrivacyPolicy:

-TASVideos does not share data with any third parties.
+The server does not transfer user data to any third-parties.
+
+Your user agent (= browser) should automatically request some necessary resources from Cloudflare's cdnjs ([https://www.cloudflare.com/privacypolicy|privacy policy]) and jsDelivr ([https://www.jsdelivr.com/terms/privacy-policy-jsdelivr-net|privacy policy]).
+On the registration and login forms, it should also request and run code from Google as part of their ''reCAPTCHA'' spam prevention service ([https://policies.google.com/privacy|privacy policy], FWIW). For the time being, circumventing this will prevent login.
+
+Additionally, some pages may contain embedded images and videos from various third-party servers, which your user agent should request automatically.

[Masterjun3]

I feel like adjustments to terms and privacy policies should be done carefully and deliberately.
This is one of those thing where I would want a precise list of what we want. Stuff like linking to our rules on every page, or making the privacy policy available on a non-system page.

I'm also not really happy with some of the changes requested here. Like using weird terms like "stewards" (I had to look it up), and things like "posts can be deleted, but not un-sent", what does that even mean? I'm also not a fan of using "FWIW" (which I also had to look up) and all other kinds of unexplained abbreviations.
I would also like an explanation of why things were added, like, why do you suggest adding the information about the captcha about "For the time being, circumventing this will prevent login".

Like, the title here says "privacy policy better", but I don't know about that...

[YoshiRulz]

I feel like adjustments to terms and privacy policies should be done carefully and deliberately. [...] I'm also not really happy with some of the changes requested here.

Agreed. These are only suggestions, and I don't doubt the wording can be improved for the benefit of non-native speakers.

"posts can be deleted, but not un-sent", what does that even mean?

"Be mindful of what you share." But now I see that's a shorter way of putting it, which is what I was going for...

I'm also not a fan of using "FWIW" (which I also had to look up) and all other kinds of unexplained abbreviations.

Fair, I was just full of anti-Google sentiment at that point (hence #1647). Where else did I abbreviate?

why do you suggest adding the information about the captcha about "For the time being, circumventing this will prevent login".

It's possible to pi-hole Google (and Cloudflare but that doesn't break anything), but until #1647 is resolved, those people won't be able to create an account or log in. As it stands, it's not obvious what the cause is or whether that's intentional. (We can't assume every pi-hole user's first thought would be to check for blocked requests.)

Like, the title here says "privacy policy better", but I don't know about that...

(Surface (TOS + privacy policy)) better. I am of the opinion that the current privacy policy has a lot of problems (for one, where is user data being stored or processed?), but that's outside the scope of this PR and not really my call to make.

[Masterjun3]

I am of the opinion that the current privacy policy has a lot of problems

I'd honestly start a public discussion somewhere, making some points and letting other people and staff contribute ideas as well. On the forum, on the github issue tracker, in a discord thread, would all probably be better places to place suggestions than inside a PR.

[vadosnaprimer]

Suggestions don't explain much without providing all the relevant context and reasons, ideally in a way that people who don't know anything about server technology could understand. And yes it should be a forum thread.

[vadosnaprimer]

No discussion of those topics on the site for 2 weeks suggests me we don't need to leave this PR open indefinitely. If there's a discussion, and an agreement, the agreed on changes can be suggested separately.

[vadosnaprimer]

Code changes look ok IMO. The rest is a site talk.

[Masterjun3]

Isn't it weird to link to a System page that clearly says "not a page intended for standalone viewing"?

[YoshiRulz]

I've just copied the login page:

tasvideos/TASVideos/Pages/Account/Login.cshtml

Line 34 in ba98795

Please view our <a href="/System/PrivacyPolicy">Privacy Policy</a>

I agree the warning could confuse new users.