What are your feelings on allowing younger users to log into SL?

[JPG0809]

By "younger" I mean at least 13 years old. I feel if LL were to lift that rule of only letting adults (people at least 18 years old) then the grid's population would increase since I believe there's a a bigger appeal for teens to explore virtual worlds like SL. Now, I'm not saying adults don't use VWs, we have around 50k users in SL on average (Also, If anyone knows, could you please tell me what was the average amount of people were on the teen grid throughout the years when it was up and running?) Then there's the question of adult content SL offers. Should SL censor it, seperate it from the rest of the grid and just create a type of red-light district and allow a larger amount of G-rated-type sims so there's more of an appeal and openness to the young user (Which I believe they did, but I was thinking more of an entire seperate grid like the teen grid but dedicated to Adult content so then you'll actually would have to be looking for that type of content), should the younger users be able to mix with the adult users like an MMO, or do you have your own input on how things should be carried out?

Thank you!

[Tex Monday]

 

NO!!!

[MIstahMoose]

MMOs all ask for parental approval of users under the age threshold. Albeit it is usually forged.

SL Did have a teen grid for awhile,but it has long been gone now. You are allowed to register on SL before you're 18, but you're limited.

My opinion on this is that we can't protect users from mingling with adults. We cannot say that there will never be a case of nudity and sexual content entering G rated areas. It just simply does, even if it says its against TOS.

So no, Let them go on more filtered Virtual worlds first. Secondlife just doesn't have the ability to monitor and protect all of its -potential- younger users.

 

[Qwalyphi Korpov]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teen_Second_Life

[Marigold Devin]

---

JPG0809 wrote:

By "younger" I mean at least 13 years old. I feel if LL were to lift that rule of only letting adults (people at least 18 years old) then the grid's population would increase since I believe there's a a bigger appeal for teens to explore virtual worlds like SL. Now, I'm not saying adults don't use VWs, we have around 50k users in SL on average (Also, If anyone knows, could you please tell me what was the average amount of people were on the teen grid throughout the years when it was up and running?) Then there's the question of adult content SL offers. Should SL censor it, seperate it from the rest of the grid and just create a type of red-light district and allow a larger amount of G-rated-type sims so there's more of an appeal and openness to the young user (Which I believe they did, but I was thinking more of an entire seperate grid like the teen grid but dedicated to Adult content so then you'll actually would have to be looking for that type of content), should the younger users be able to mix with the adult users like an MMO, or do you have your own input on how things should be carried out?

 

Thank you!

---

13-18 year olds should be encouraged to go outdoors and mix with the 3D people much more than they are now.  Fun exercise like ice skating should be free and compulsory.  And no way should they be able to access Second Life, not even for so-called educational purposes.

This is my feelings. Today. About this topic.

[Theodore DuCasse]

16 and 17 year olds have been allowed on the main grid since the Teen Grid closed. AFAIK there have been no reported major problems with them on the main grid since their transition to the main grid in 2011.

Anything younger, well... they would have to be restricted to either PG sims or a special area of the grid with safety measures.

I'm not opposed to the idea - SL has a lot of content you wouldn't want them to see (i.e. Zindra), but MORE content that there is no reason they shouldn't see. Teens are creative and many use Minecraft, so I don't see why they shouldn't have some sort of access to SL's creative tools - even in a restricted and somewhat policed environment.

But if SL is struggling to retain adult users, I'm not sure how many teens would be interested with so many other choices now, such as more and more free-to-play MMO games. And land is too expensive even for most adults now, so many of them would be limited to working in sandboxes.

[sirhc DeSantis]

---

Tex Monday wrote:

 

NO!!!

---

As Tex rather summed up my response so perfectly I thought it easier to quote directly.

 

[Parrish Ashbourne]

oops was trying to correct some thing but it all got deleted, out off time to repost.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Parrish Ashbourne wrote:

13 is the current minimum age, but their restricted to grated land. 

</snip>

 

---

The restriction is a little deeper than that. 

They are only allowed access through a sponsoring organization, usually educational, and are restricted to that organizations private SIMs.

All content would by necessity in order to comply with the TOS be G Rated.  (Though actually it's a matter of what it could not be, Adult Rated).

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

JPG0809 wrote:

By "younger" I mean at least 13 years old. I feel if LL were to lift that rule of only letting adults (people at least 18 years old) then the grid's population would increase since I believe there's a a bigger appeal for teens to explore virtual worlds like SL. Now, I'm not saying adults don't use VWs, we have around 50k users in SL on average (Also, If anyone knows, could you please tell me what was the average amount of people were on the teen grid throughout the years when it was up and running?) Then there's the question of adult content SL offers. Should SL censor it, seperate it from the rest of the grid and just create a type of red-light district and allow a larger amount of G-rated-type sims so there's more of an appeal and openness to the young user (Which I believe they did, but I was thinking more of an entire seperate grid like the teen grid but dedicated to Adult content so then you'll actually would have to be looking for that type of content), should the younger users be able to mix with the adult users like an MMO, or do you have your own input on how things should be carried out?

 

Thank you!

---

Young teens wandering through Second Life freely? My God! Do you want them to lose what little respect they still have for adults altogether?

[Tari Landar]

Nope.

As both a parent and an adult(in age at least) I like it how it is-well, not like, but I have settled with what it is. They had to merge the teen grid for a reason and while I may not agree with that, it was their decision. Things have moved, relatively smoothly and aside from some minor issues(pun totally intended) there haven't been that many.

I have teens....they have NO place on this grid, period. MIne wouldn't even be remotely interested in the grid in the first place. There are places geared more towards them that they can participate in, that allow them to interact with other humans in a virtual space(of sorts).

Bottom line, sl isn't really for kids. Even the areas that are family friendly, aren't really geared towards kids, more like adults who just prefer family friendly areas, and adults playing child avatars.

IF they were going to make any change at all, it would be to change the age to 18 period. But they wouldn't detur teens, it never did.

My kids have their own opensim, if they want to try out building, scripting and all of that neat stuff, they can do it there, through our own server, without the issues teens would run into when it comes to interacting with adults.

No, they don't need to separate out the sex or adult content, and create, yet another, red light district. Sorry that would not appeal to the masses. I have been here since 2004 and the setup they have now, does far better than any setup they've had before. Connecting an entire grid, to what exists now, would kill off the population, not increase it. Have you considered just how many would leave for the "new grid" or how much content would have to be moved? Or any of the technical points? It's not a matter of ...ok, here, have a grid, put all your adult stuff here, keep everythign sunshine and rainbows on the main grid. Nah, we don't need that kind of separation, we really don't. We already have it.

[Amethyst Jetaime]

Absolutely NOT.

Free run of SL is not for minors, IMO.  I wouldn't allow any young teen of mine to use it unless they are restricted to a private sim through a sponsoring organization.  I wouldn't even allow a teen 16+ to use it without me seeing them register and give the correct date of birth so they are restricted to G content.  Even then i'd discourage it and keep a close eye on them when they were logged in if they used it.

[Syo Emerald]

I don't get how you come to your idea, that Second Life would be appealing for teenagers from the age of 13. Its requirements (technical and mental) aren't very customer orientated and definitly not aimed at someone who is 13 today. Its questionable how attractive SL could be to teens, currently its definitly not and time has shown that virtual worlds like this are  niche products.

So you have a more or less stable userbase, which contains mostly adults....and your other ideas aim directly at destroying that stable userbase. You don't seem to have put much tought into this. Example needed? Seperating A land also means cutting off M rated land, because its also not intented to be vitited by minors, you would basically cut of a huge active part of Second Life and create a new Teengrid.

And there is a lot more why your idea won't work. For myself, I can assure you, I wouldn't want to spend much time on G rated land.

 

 

[Parrish Ashbourne]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Parrish Ashbourne wrote:

13 is the current minimum age, but their restricted to grated land. 

</snip>

 

---

The restriction is a little deeper than that. 

They are only allowed access through a sponsoring organization, usually educational, and are restricted to that organizations private SIMs.

All content would by necessity in order to comply with the TOS be G Rated.  (Though actually it's a matter of what it could not be, Adult Rated).

---

Thanks for the correction, that's a good thing, but it still leaves 16 and 17 years olds in SL on G rated land which my point of cost being an stopping block form much ever getting developed specficly for/by that age group in terms of land .  

Personaly I'd rather see SL be rescricted to 18 and over,  there's just too much crazy stuff out there.

[Senobia Xenga]

---

Tex Monday wrote:

 

NO!!!

---

^^^^ This.

 

[Canoro Philipp]

those issues were already thought by Linden Lab and the solutions were applied.

13 year olds are allowed in SL in sims owned by organizations, such as educational, that allow them to have an account.

Linden Lab lift the rule of only letting adults in the main grid and now 16-18 are allowed to roam in places rated G.

teens are welcome to Second Life by Linden Lab.

Linden Lab censored adult content, separate it from the rest of the grid by creating Zindra, a red-light-district. the other places that have adult content were forced to be rated Adult, blocking it from teens access.

the teens are allowed to mix with adults in G rated areas, like an MMO.

all your ideas have been applied.

[JPG0809]

 

---

Syo Emerald wrote:

I don't get how you come to your idea, that Second Life would be appealing for teenagers from the age of 13. 

 

---

 

Well, there are many virtual worlds and (mostly chatroom-type) sites that have their target users being younger to mid-teens. Of course, some would argue that SL has way more features than say, IMVU or Habbo Hotel. That still doesn't change the fact that, at their main core, they all have that feature of allowing the user to socialize with others. What's more, SL has that feature AND another list of options which can entice new users who are already familar or looking for virtual worlds and think they'll be getting into something better because of what SL offers which is more detail.

 

---

Syo Emerald wrote:

Its requirements (technical and mental) aren't very customer orientated and definitly not aimed at someone who is 13 today.

---

I think that just has to do with practice, really.

I think the average SL user:

• Navigates around the grid (In which I'm meaning both with the keyboard controls and SL's search engine),
• Attends events
• Chats
• Buy/spends lindens
• Fiddles with their avatar's appearance.

The hardest is probably adjusting the avatar's appearance IMO. You need to try on different clothes, may or may not adjust the positioning of the clothes in the edit menu,learning the features of the edit menu, understand mesh clothing and what alpha layers are, but that's all just practice with a few clicks and moving arrows. Same goes with navigating through the viewer.

 

---

Syo Emerald wrote:

So you have a more or less stable userbase, which contains mostly adults....and your other ideas aim directly at destroying that stable userbase. You don't seem to have put much tought into this. Example needed? Seperating A land also means cutting off M rated land, because its also not intented to be vitited by minors, you would basically cut of a huge active part of Second Life and create a new Teengrid.

---

That's because the examples I gave weren't fully realized, they were just thoughts on the top of my head. It wasn't my intention to seem like was saying, "I FOUND OUR SOLUTION!" *throws confetti*. I'm sorry if I made myself seem that way. You're right, maybe some of the suggestions I gave would have fudged up the grid immensly. However, I wouldn't want to destory the userbase, but work around it if I could. I honestly don't have a solid answer which is why I'm making this thread and see what other's think.

The main question(s) is/are: 

• What are your feelings on letting younger users (at least 13) on the grid?
• How would you go about doing this or how do you believe this should be handled?

---

Syo Emerald wrote:

 For myself, I can assure you, I wouldn't want to spend much time on G rated land.

 

 

 I always wondered if LL could maybe change how they go about rating certain sims on what could be considered G, M and A. Maybe the criteria could be reworked so that what's allowed in a G rated would be different than what it is today. What makes me want this change is that even today, if you're at least 16, you can go to G rated areas but, if you find an area that seems interesting to you but it's M rated, you can't go in there and that's fine since there's a reason for it, minors should not excess that type of content. However, most of the events/sims showcased in the destination guide and search engine are Moderate and Adult rated sims (mostly M, though) and it greatly outweighs the amount of G rated sims. So, if the user can't even get into the sims he/she find's interesting and is just given what seems to be mere table-scraps compared to what's offered to people that are at least adults, then what is there to do other than leave or just settle with what you got and wait a couple of years? It just seems unwelcoming to the younger users who want to give SL a genuine chance.

 

 

 

 

[irihapeti]

i think that the presumption is that junior teens would want to if permitted. Am not sure that this is the case. Also I dont think there are sufficient numbers of parents either who would permit it even if allowed

any numbers gained would be balanced if not outweighed by the numbers of mature people exiting. Which would have some effect I think on the balance of people remaining able or willing to afford the tiers 

[Tari Landar]

---

JPG0809 wrote:

 then what is there to do other than leave or just settle with what you got and wait a couple of years? It just seems unwelcoming to the younger users who want to give SL a genuine chance.

 

 

---

I'm quoting this part only because it's important and the rest has been covered.

What is there to do? Go live life.

That is all there is to it, really. People, especially young people, these days are completely and utterly locked at the hip with electronic devices. Kids need to be kids much, much longer than they are today. There is a massively beautiful, bright, invigorating, amazing, stupendous....need I go on? ....world all around them. THAT is where they need to be. 

If you asked my teens, they'd tell you, outside, with friends, exploring the world-as best they are able-and enjoying life are their favorite things. Their favorite toys? Yep my kids have toys, even the teens. Those aren't electronic devices either. If more parents raised their children in a manner more conducive to living within their world, we just might have a few less that feel the need to interact primarily on technologically driven devices. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Some adults, actually probably a large portion, who are in sl simply cannot explore the real world all around them and fully enjoy it. It is fantastic they have sl for this purposes. Kids, on the other hand, are not often limited in the same ways, and those who are, likely have at least one caregiver, if not multiple, that can help them do the things they cannot do, and try to incorporate as much of the world into their lives as possible.

Bottom line, kids do NOT need sl, so it should not be catered to them.

Now I am by no means a child hater, or anything of the sort. In fact, we even use OS sims, and a couple other OS sims created by like minded parents, for educational purposes. It's wonderful that our children can do this, and use it to their advantage. However it is very strictly monitored, as we(the parents) are always right there with them. They could get very little educationally out of sl, and they certainly do not need the entertainment it provides. Some of our kids have enjoyed learning all about how to stream into this OS sims so others could enjoy music, we've even had "concerts"(about as close as you get with the majority of "concerts" you'd see in sl, social gatherings, classes...And the best part is, it's all free. We run the servers, we host the sims, we control who can and cannot get in, in fact, we control everything. So, options exist. 

But, really, kids do not need sl. Anyone that thinks they do, is not thinking clearly. Why would you want to push children, yes they are children, towards a virtual world and away from the real one? There are countless things they can use for entertainment purposes, including social places. Sl just doesn't need to be one of them. In fact, I'd actually venture a guess that SL isn't even interesting to most teens, and definitely not those who are younger. Sure, some, probably a very few in the grand scheme, but most...absolutely not.

[JPG0809]

 

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

JPG0809 wrote:

 then what is there to do other than leave or just settle with what you got and wait a couple of years? It just seems unwelcoming to the younger users who want to give SL a genuine chance.

 

 

---

 

What is there to do? Go live life.

 

---

I think that can be applied to the "leave" option.

 

I agree with you 100% that not only kids but people in general don't need SL to enjoy life (unless there's maybe a situation involving addiction or something like that). Bottom line, I understand.

Some may think that technology in general takes away a child's well, childhood, today. I think it can be their lives/childhood or it can just be a part of it and depending on how much the child uses the technology makes up on how big that part actually is. It doesn't keep a child or anyone else from living life if you have a balance and it can be that way, you can have the best of both worlds.

 

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

Why would you want to push children, yes they are children, towards a virtual world and away from the real one? There are countless things they can use for entertainment purposes, including social places. Sl just doesn't need to be one of them. 

---

Pushing anything on anybody is almost always wrong. However, this isn't about advertising  or preaching SL to younger teens, this is more on how to welcome them if THEY'RE interested. Yes, there are many sources of entertainment and SL can be one of them as well.

 

[Tari Landar]

---

JPG0809 wrote:

 

Pushing anything on anybody is almost always wrong. However, this isn't about advertising  or preaching SL to younger teens, this is more on how to welcome them if THEY'RE interested. Yes, there are many sources of entertainment and SL can be one of them as well.

 

---

But they already have options if they're interested in sl. They don't need more.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Canoro Philipp wrote:

Linden Lab censored adult content, separate it from the rest of the grid by creating Zindra, a red-light-district. the other places that have adult content were forced to be rated Adult, blocking it from teens access.

---

That's not true. Adult content is allowed everywhere except G sims. In M sims, the use of it has to be behind closed doors, except in stores that sell it, where it can be briefly tried out, with a view to buying it, as long as the particpants are clothed.

[Kyrah Abattoir]

My answer? I don't care, as long as there is no changes in the parcel classification system.

[Syo Emerald]

I think that just has to do with practice, really.

But its already too much for the average, impatient person, who is used to get everything served in small easy packages. Where should the patience and motivation to deal with the viewer and everything else come from? In addition I don't know how many 13 year olds own a game pc or laptop, many of them seem to be more interested in smartphones and tablets. I got into computergames when I was a child because my father was playing and when I turned 15, I brought my own PC that could handle online games, but I wouldn't see that as the norm.

The main question(s) is/are: 

• What are your feelings on letting younger users (at least 13) on the grid?

I don't feel a need to talk or be around 13 year olds. We wouldn't have anything in common or to talk about. I would probably feel awkward around them or be annoyed by their behavior.

 

• How would you go about doing this or how do you believe this should be handled?

Leave it as it is or even better: Bring back the old verification process, if possible.

 

My personal viewpoint on G rated sims is, that they are restricting me in my freedom, are boring and run by not very sympathic people. The only G rated sims I visit are some that have shops and fashion events on them and one quiet sandbox to unpack my stuff or be afk at. The last time (years ago) when I visited a G rated sim that was anything different than that, I remember being told to put on different pants, because mine were too short. And sorry, I don't want to dress up in a burka, just in case someone can't deal with virtual exposed skin.

For the same reason I would never rent land on G rated sims, because I'm not willing to take up arguments about the scripts within the furniture in my home or if I'm allowed to change clothes there. Pushing M and A rated land off the grid into some dark corner would remove a various of hangouts I use to go to from me. I don't want to be labeld as some sexual deviant, who visits a red light district...just because i like to hang out at clubs that allow nudity.

Of course events and activity on M and A rated sims outweight the one on G rated land by far and that makes this regions even more unattractive to teens, but doesn't that speak a clear language of what the actual userbase prefers? Because in the end, adults pay for the land the buildings and events are on and many of them might not want to spend their hard earned money on a sim with a different rating.

[Tex Monday]

---

Syo Emerald wrote:

I think that just has to do with practice, really.

But its already too much for the average, impatient person, who is used to get everything served in small easy packages. Where should the patience and motivation to deal with the viewer and everything else come from?

In addition I don't know how many 13 year olds own a game pc or laptop, many of them seem to be more interested in smartphones and tablets

. I got into computergames when I was a child because my father was playing and when I turned 15, I brought my own PC that could handle online games, but I wouldn't see that as the norm.

 

---

I dont know how true that is, Syo. My son (who is 10 and does not have a phone, by the way...which is a totally different discussion :matte-motes-sunglasses-3:) plays on my computer and when I got a new one, he used the old one. He can only use it on the weekends (so it doesn't interfere wtih school work) but when he does, he's on Minecraft ALL THE TIME!

On another note, I find it really funny listening to him talk about Minecraft and how the lingo is the same as SL: RP, build, friend requests...makes me laugh every time I hear him say "Someone wants me to help them with an RP"