A Valorant streamer by the name of Lucas "lucas57fr" has found himself in the cogs of a discussion following his suspension from Twitter, a month after he got banned from Twitch for being too young.For those unaware, the Amazon-owned platform has a minimum age limit of 13 years. Despite streaming under the watchful eyes of his parents, Lucas, who is only 11, did not qualify as a legible creator on the platform, which resulted in his suspension.The news was shared by online reporter Jake Lucky, whose tweet thread received a host of reactions. While some sided with the platform's decision, others were critical since adult streamers often only get temporary suspensions for violating the platform's Terms of Service (ToS).Jake Lucky@JakeSucky1 month ago, Twitch banned Lucas the youngest Radiant player in Valorant at just 11 years old because he was not old enough to stream on Twitch (13 years old via Twitch terms of service) despite streaming with his parentsLucas has now also been banned from Twitter186137181 month ago, Twitch banned Lucas the youngest Radiant player in Valorant at just 11 years old because he was not old enough to stream on Twitch (13 years old via Twitch terms of service) despite streaming with his parentsLucas has now also been banned from Twitter https://t.co/ovdpec6XIF11-year-old Valorant streamer's suspension from Twitch provokes debate in the gaming communityAs stated earlier, Lucas is not eligible to be a full-time streamer on Twitch since he is only 11 years old. According to the platform's policies, creators between the ages of 13 and 18 can stream, but only after adult supervision at the time of their live broadcast. As per Twitch:"Children under 13 may not use Twitch. We are committed to upholding our age restrictions to keep kids and teens safe. If you know someone under the age of 13 is using Twitch please let us know."Following Twitch's decision to suspend the Valorant streamer, Twitter, despite its new ownership, has maintained its policy of having set its age limit to 13 or over. According to Twitter:"Twitter requires people using the service to be 13 years of age or older."Lucas' emargo from both platforms has led to a rather diverse set of reactions. As mentioned earlier, while an overwhelming number of people believed his removal was the right choice, some pointed out that other charades often go unpunished. Here are some relevant reactions:DudeiRage@DudeIRage@JakeSucky Some of you folks are saying rules are rules and you’re absolutely right. They’re there for a reason, but this occurrence brings us an opportunity to questions why it was set in place. These should be determined on a case to case basis. What’s to say the parents didn’t make 1/?24@JakeSucky Some of you folks are saying rules are rules and you’re absolutely right. They’re there for a reason, but this occurrence brings us an opportunity to questions why it was set in place. These should be determined on a case to case basis. What’s to say the parents didn’t make 1/?DudeiRage@DudeIRage@JakeSucky The account and allow him to use it to stream. Or are you saying now that we should ban adults who have children on camera? It’s the same exact principal in this case because both of his parents are present.They decide when the stream ends, they decide what’s poison 2/?8@JakeSucky The account and allow him to use it to stream. Or are you saying now that we should ban adults who have children on camera? It’s the same exact principal in this case because both of his parents are present.They decide when the stream ends, they decide what’s poison 2/?DudeiRage@DudeIRage@JakeSucky To their son or not, not us. I totally get that 13 is the rule. Another argument that some of you are making is “he should be outside playing” hell yeah, probably should, but we don’t know this kids life and why is that our judgement to make? He wants to stream games3/?7@JakeSucky To their son or not, not us. I totally get that 13 is the rule. Another argument that some of you are making is “he should be outside playing” hell yeah, probably should, but we don’t know this kids life and why is that our judgement to make? He wants to stream games3/?This user suggested that the Twitch chat can get ugly or toxic if unmonitored:kelly@kellymilkies@DudeIRage @JakeSucky Issue here is it clearly is his acc. Minors are allowed to be guests on streams w approval.His parents are free to be streamers themselves & let him to play with them.I get what you’re saying but you know most under-13s lack such parental monitoring.Have you seen twitch chat?1@DudeIRage @JakeSucky Issue here is it clearly is his acc. Minors are allowed to be guests on streams w approval.His parents are free to be streamers themselves & let him to play with them.I get what you’re saying but you know most under-13s lack such parental monitoring.Have you seen twitch chat?Another user hinted that removing the age restriction could entice many parents to compel their kids to take up streaming to generate revenue. They wrote:Eric C@EricC1001@DudeIRage @JakeSucky As soon as you say you can monetize a 13year old there will be parents forcing kids to stream for potential revenue. It'd be Toddlers in Tiaras-Gamer Edition. "13" isn't just to protect kids from viewers/pvp opponents but also their own families.2@DudeIRage @JakeSucky As soon as you say you can monetize a 13year old there will be parents forcing kids to stream for potential revenue. It'd be Toddlers in Tiaras-Gamer Edition. "13" isn't just to protect kids from viewers/pvp opponents but also their own families.This individual believes that the ban is unjustified since his parents monitor his screen during livestreams:JawbreakerX@jawbreaker_x@DudeIRage @JakeSucky i was gonna say the ban was in the right assuming he was alone, however if his parents are supervising him then im totally against the banwe really dont need more groomer cases in the valorant community, im all for the unban assuming his parents know what's happening2@DudeIRage @JakeSucky i was gonna say the ban was in the right assuming he was alone, however if his parents are supervising him then im totally against the banwe really dont need more groomer cases in the valorant community, im all for the unban assuming his parents know what's happeningThe community continues to remain divided. Another user said:Adorate Luna@AdorateLuna@DudeIRage @JakeSucky While he does have supervision, it is still against ToS CURRENTLY at least. I personally think it would be better to just wait the couple of years. If he's already this good, he could be even better and not have to worry. (1/2)2@DudeIRage @JakeSucky While he does have supervision, it is still against ToS CURRENTLY at least. I personally think it would be better to just wait the couple of years. If he's already this good, he could be even better and not have to worry. (1/2)Here are some other reactions:Adorate Luna@AdorateLuna@DudeIRage @JakeSucky That being said, I don't think a PERMA is warranted. Should be a ban untill he turns 13. Also agree that Twitch is wildin by only giving a 2 day ban for intercourse. Slap them with a perma and gettem outta here (2/2)2@DudeIRage @JakeSucky That being said, I don't think a PERMA is warranted. Should be a ban untill he turns 13. Also agree that Twitch is wildin by only giving a 2 day ban for intercourse. Slap them with a perma and gettem outta here (2/2)Ben Newton@BNewtonUK@DudeIRage @JakeSucky Companies HAVE to set rules because humans can’t be expected to be good parents.This might be a controversial take but, no 11 year old should be putting in the time it takes to grind to radiant rank, whilst streaming inorganically with his parents peering over his shoulder.@DudeIRage @JakeSucky Companies HAVE to set rules because humans can’t be expected to be good parents.This might be a controversial take but, no 11 year old should be putting in the time it takes to grind to radiant rank, whilst streaming inorganically with his parents peering over his shoulder.Nightbot@Nightbo95388224@DudeIRage @JakeSucky so bad behavior is okay if the parents support it? First of all rules are rules so idk why yall r mad that he got banned second an 11 year old kid shouldnt be playing for hours and hours and stream it he should be outside living life not doing this bs@DudeIRage @JakeSucky so bad behavior is okay if the parents support it? First of all rules are rules so idk why yall r mad that he got banned second an 11 year old kid shouldnt be playing for hours and hours and stream it he should be outside living life not doing this bsJake Lucky, who first reported the story, also revealed that the parents admitted that they were wrong in allowing Lucas to stream. As of this writing, the Valorant streamer's parents are in contact with the platform to come to a viable agreement.