Yeah I do mind. From what I read, people only didn't like the fact that they couldn't see if they were giving sexual advice to a 13 y/o or a 17y/o. If that was the only issue, why didn't they just mark everyone over 18 as >18 and everyone under 18 get one candy icon for 17, two candies icons for 16 ... to five candies icons for 13, so people know for sure how saccharine their answers need to be?
I really don't like being forced to show that information. If I could choose I would make age groups starting at under 18 and then stagger age brackets by around every five years or so: similar to like it originally was a few months go. They could add an option in the settings to show a users exact age if that user desires to. According to your poll, almost half of us (not counting the users that are currently not using the site because of that loss of anonymity) don't want to show an exact age so I don't see why the owner doesn't add that choice for privacy.
Now the judging will commence. Before if you saw (under 18) it could be assumed the person was 16 or 17 and at least had an idea, and like that wasn't judgmental/prejudiced enough if the question came from a (25-34) range, now, when the opinion comes from a 13 year old, it won't be taken that seriously. Of course some nosy parkers on GaG are gonna love the new layout. but this change is doing more harm than good if you ask me. I do agree with the anonymous thing though.
I like it, it's annoying to see an "Under 18" next to your name, I am seventeen and there a people who are 18 or 19 who disqualify my opinion just because I am under 18, however now they'll see that I am basically just as old as them.