Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

I guess US citizens can be more relaxed about it only because the US law seems to have no problem with an age "verification" that consits of simply clicking a button that sais "I am at least 18 years old".

---

German law apparently doesn't either, if you're in sl at all. Because that's the verification for sl too, and has been for years.

---

Wrong. SL would not be allowed to run on German servers. You won't find a porn site running on German servers without a rigid age verification system.

 

 

---

What does this achieve, other than preventing porn from running on German servers?  

It can't stop under-age Germans from accessing porn if they want to, since they can find it easily enough on servers based outside Germany, in countries (such as the USA) where the law is more lax.

Anyway since there's no conceivable reason why LL would want to use servers based in Germany (rather than any other EU country), the point seems irrelevant.   

 

 

[Thomas Galbreus]

No, German users can't be as relaxed becasue using a service like SL hosted elsewhere without age verification conforming to the German law can get them in trouble as pointed out. Protection of minors is of course not effective because of the lax law outside Germany, but that is not the fault of the German law.

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

No, German users can't be as relaxed becasue using a service like SL hosted elsewhere without age verification conforming to the German law can get them in trouble as pointed out. Protection of minors is of course not effective because of the lax law outside Germany, but that is not the fault of the German law.

---

Can you show me an example of a German company that has an effective age verification program?

[Gavin Hird]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

No, German users can't be as relaxed becasue using a service like SL hosted elsewhere without age verification conforming to the German law can get them in trouble as pointed out. Protection of minors is of course not effective because of the lax law outside Germany, but that is not the fault of the German law.

---

The German population must tremble in fear in front of their screens as they surf pron on the net... :-)

[Phil Deakins]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

This is becoming stupid.

---

Only because you post such nonsense.

 

---

Allegation I didn't answer the question blahblah. I did by saying that in such situation (robber in the street) the protection failed, which can happen because of course law (including it's enforcement) does not prevent EVERY crime = ALL crimes. Is EVERY also ambiguous in English??

---

Ah. In that case you agree that laws cannot protect anyone from anything. So why all the arguing from you?

Just one point though. The protection didn't "fail", simply because there was none. In order for something to fail, it first must exist. That's logic. You really need to think about things before you start arguing about them. Oh. You also need to understand the word "logic", which is a thing you claim to use, but, in this discussion, what you've posted is illogical. You try to make out that words on paper can actually protect someone from something, but in the example I offered you say that they can't. You should make up your mind what you mean.

Allow me an attempt at making it even clearer for you. Words on paper (laws) cannot protect anyone form anything, and they cannot prevent anything from happening. Here's where you come in. If a person knows about the words on paper, and if that person decides to not do something because of those words, then the words were influential in something not happening. You see the difference? It needs both the words AND the person's agreement for something not to happen. On their own, the words are powerless to affect anything. In other words, laws cannot protect anyone from anything. Which, of course, is what you wrongly disagreed with.

I hope that helps

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

No, German users can't be as relaxed becasue using a service like SL hosted elsewhere without age verification conforming to the German law can get them in trouble as pointed out. Protection of minors is of course not effective because of the lax law outside Germany, but that is not the fault of the German law.

---

Quite possibly so, but that isn't what I asked you.

I asked what was achieved by banning the hosting of porn on German servers unless the site had strict age verification.   It doesn't seem to me a law that can achieve anything very much.   It certainly can't protect underaged Germans in any way.

I can't comment on what you say about the legal hazards someone in Germany apparently puts himself into by using SL, since I'm not familiar with German law, but I have to say that it sounds more than a bit odd to me that, at least under normal circumstances, a prosecutor would try to get a conviction for someone acting in good faith in SL, at least in any jurisdiction that uses the concept of mens rea and adheres to the normal burden and standard of proof in a criminal case.     It's not the sort criminal process I associate with contemporary Germany.   The old DDR, maybe, not contemporary Germany.

 

 

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

I did not mean it in the sense of psychological health problems, but see it as  a character problem. I don't doubt for a minute that even outright evil people, even  murderers, can be healthy and happy.

---

Character problem?!  LOL 

Oh my, you're going off some unsubstantiated prejudices here. (Why you'd even write the words "murderers" and "evil people" in the same discussion is beyond me.  As there's no connection. 

 

 

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

 

If someone has the character distortion of finding pleasure in supressing a woman, of course he feels splendid if he finds a victim. And concerning the victim who also feels good about being one: "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe)

---

Being a dominate isn't about "suppressing" anyone.    Nor, is being submissive, equal to being a "victim".   Good grief.  Now you're clearly showing your ignorance.    There's no enslavement, as all are free and equal in the relationship. 

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

The text you linked includes the statement: "These roles showed some links to psychological health, such that dominants tended to score highest in all quarters, submissives lowest and switches in the middle." That supports my thesis that letting someone enslave you is not the wisest of ideas.

---

No, it doesn't.   ALL those in the BDSM study scored at least the same or better than people who are classified as "vanilla".   You failed to include the full quote:

"These roles showed some links to psychological health, such that dominants tended to score highest in all quarters, submissives lowest and switches in the middle. However, submissives never scored lower than vanilla participants on mental health, and frequently scored higher, Wismeijer told LiveScience.

 

 

Why are using the word, "enslaved"?   I can tell you that no one is in that category.    (it does illustrate how confused you are in your thinking)

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

 

One commentator pointed out: "They did the study by filling out questionaires. On questionaires, it is often those who lie best about themselves who look best. They were not actually studied by psychologists."

---

Of course, if a study doesn't say what you want it too, you'll choose to disregard it.  LOL    Thomas, you're not showing your logical thinking here yet...when do we get to see it?  ; )

 

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

I pointed out several times that I am not against any form of porn, only against porn that I consider an assault on human dignity, like misogynic porn - which sadly is the majority of porn. Concerning that, should it also be painted on some cave wall: Humans have been assaulting human dignity in any imaginable form for thousands of years. Long practise does not mean legitimation.

---

Thomas, it's all in the eyes of the beholder.   There's no universal "form of porn" that all will agree is objectionable.  So, I shall reject your assessment, as you've posted commentary that I find quite offensive.   As such, I don't see you as a valid source for determining objectionable material. 

 

Also, I see no reason to ban that which we do not like.  If we go that route, where do we stop?   By who's definition is content deemed acceptable?  So, no....I take a libertarian stance.    Let the individual use their free will, to either see, or not see, that which they do not like.   This is a virtual world for adults, those who wish to visit "Sanitized World" can go elsewhere.

 

 

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

I consider virtual imitations of erotic activity very dull compared to the real thing. It's not what I'm after in a virtual world at all.

---

Good, then I won't have to eject you from my adult sims.  ; ) 

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

You mean I would be an alt of Jo Yardley? I think she is interesting, so I see it as a compliment. Sadly my English is not as fluent as hers, so if you still think I'm her, it is another compliment. Jo lobbied for no porn? Do you have a link?

---

Anyone could be alt of another I suppose.

 

I don't have a link to Jo, but she has repeatedly stated that she's embarrassed to mention SL to people. (Due to the adult content associations and articles)   That she doesn't like the "adult" type content in SL, and she goes out of her way to say that she doesn't have that in her sims.  (She also implies through her many posts, and comments, that the adult segment of SL is a detriment to SL.)   

 

So, all that (In my opinion) is her not so subtle way, of "lobbying" against inworld porn and adult content.

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

By the way, Jo Yardley is one of the poeple who work hard in communicating to the outside world that SL has interesting things to offer that don't comform with the cliché, and I salute her for that. So in that sense she is not "ashamed to mention SL to people".

I tried to do that in the past, but not as committed, and gave up because it didn't seem to help the raised eyebrows.

---

She's posted that she was ashamed to mention SL due to the adult content and articles.  I've read her comments where she wrote that. 

 

But, there are people all over SL who actively work to promote SL, to the larger world, and due so without making negative asides, for the things they don't like.  I give them many more Kudos.

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

Can you show me an example of a German company that has an effective age verification program?

---

The most common method is called "Postident-Verfahren", which includes showing your identity document at a post office. Direct banks often use it for age verification in Germany. Examples:

http://www.bankofscotland.de/mediaObject/documents/bos/de/downloads/leitfaeden/Postident-Coupon/original/Postident-Coupon.pdf

https://www.volkswagenbank.de/de/privatkunden/kundenservice/hilfe/fragen_Antworten/allgemeines/legitimation.html

http://www.wuestenrotdirect.de/de/bank/service_2/service_3/fragenantwortenneu_2/kontodepoterffnung_1.html?searchresult

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

 It doesn't seem to me a law that can achieve anything very much.   It certainly can't protect underaged Germans in any way.

---

Only because of stupid laws elsewhere.

What is the situation with direct banking accounts in the US, can these also be created by simply lying when pressing a button?

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Why you'd even write the words "murderers" and "evil people" in the same discussion is beyond me.  As there's no connection. 

---

You don't think evil murderers have a character problem?

I didn't say those who suppress in relationships are as bad, I said even murderers can be healthy and happy despite having an even more severe character failure.

Of course "character" is not a precise scientific category, which makes it a matter of opinion. I think I am free to express my opinions here.

 

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

all are free and equal in the relationship

---

Sounds pretty "vanilla" (seems to be your term for reasonable) then.

Elsewhere you said the most exciting thing for you would be getting dominated by a man, at the same time claiming you were dominant yourself.

So now I am confused and don't now whether you are submissive, dominant or reasonable.

 

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

However, submissives never scored lower than vanilla participants on mental health

---

Doesn't change my point that they scored constantly lower than their "masters". By the way I would prefer a person with a mental health issue over a person with a character issue as a company anytime.

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

I see no reason to ban that which we do not like

---

So do I, but I see a reason to hide porn from minors and to seperate virtual worlds with and without porn content to save the latter from stigma and growth limit.

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

Drake1Nightfire wrote:

Can you show me an example of a German company that has an effective age verification program?

---

The most common method is called "Postident-Verfahren", which includes showing your identity document at a post office. Direct banks often use it for age verification in Germany. Examples:

http://www.bankofscotland.de/mediaObject/documents/bos/de/downloads/leitfaeden/Postident-Coupon/original/Postident-Coupon.pdf

https://www.volkswagenbank.de/de/privatkunden/kundenservice/hilfe/fragen_Antworten/allgemeines/legitimation.html

http://www.wuestenrotdirect.de/de/bank/service_2/service_3/fragenantwortenneu_2/kontodepoterffnung_1.html?searchresult

---

OK sunshine.. We were talking about online verification. If you want to go that route then, show me one single state in the US that will sell cigarettes to anyone under 18, or liquor to someone under 21. Kind of blows your whole, "The US is lax on age verification." Oh yeah, perhaps you missed all the new gambling regs that LL is rolling out. You can thank US laws for that.

It's pointless to talk to you, you change your stance every post and pick lines of text out of context to suit your views.

[Thomas Galbreus]

I don't get your post. It is age verification for online services. Postident being considered as one of the safest methods includes verification of identity documents at post offices. Once done, you can use any online service that has a contract with the verification service you used. What's the problem, don't you have identity documents or post offices in the US?

ETA: And where did I change my stance?

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

I don't get your post. It is age verification for online services. Postident being considered as one of the safest methods includes verification of identity documents at post offices. Once done, you can use any online service that has a contract with the verification service you used. What's the problem, don't you have identity documents or post offices in the US?

ETA: And where did I change my stance?

---

Apparently we are a tad more technologically advanced in the US. We can enter our birthdate on websites. And for a while LL was accepting Social Security numbers and or drivers liscense numbers as identification. Why can't you just input your identification number on a website run by the company?

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Why you'd even write the words "murderers" and "evil people" in the same discussion is beyond me.  As there's no connection. 

---

You don't think evil murderers have a character problem?

---

I meant in the same discussion as BDSM, when there's no connection.  You're trying to make an association where there is none.  

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

I didn't say those who suppress in relationships are as bad, I said even murderers can be healthy and happy despite having an even more severe character failure.

---

There is no suppressing.   This has nothing to do with murderers.   You just completely make **bleep** up.  Talk about character failure.

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

Of course "character" is not a precise scientific category, which makes it a matter of opinion. I think I am free to express my opinions here.

---

 

Yup, and I'm free to tell you that you're typing ignorant hyperbolic nonsense.   

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

Sounds pretty "vanilla" (seems to be your term for reasonable) then.

---

It's not my  term, it's one used by the general public.  (Perhaps if you read a little  ; ) 

 

It also doesn't mean "reasonable", it means without an acknowledged dominant or submissive (or m/s) element in the relationship.  Which is rather amusing, as all relationships have those elements.  But, most people are not in-tune with themselves, or confident enough to acknowledge it.  (I do mean all relationships, as it's in our employment situations, schools, families, friends, etc. )

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

Elsewhere you said the most exciting thing for you would be getting dominated by a man, at the same time claiming you were dominant yourself.

So now I am confused and don't now whether you are submissive, dominant or reasonable.

---

Well, we do know one thing, you have a reading comprehension problem.  *laughs*    Go back and read my comment again.  ; )

 

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

Doesn't change my point that they scored constantly lower than their "masters". By the way I would prefer a person with a mental health issue over a person with a character issue as a company anytime.

---

Quite a few people don't stay as a submissive, or a dominant.  They sometimes change (switch), so your conclusions are off, as at any given point, the scoring, per person could change.  (But, all the BDSM people would still score higher than your group.  ; )

*Still no character issue with the BDSM people.  So, you're actually saying you would prefer a person with a mental health issue over a perfectly nice normal person that you have an irrational prejudice against.  Got it.

 

 

*Repeating a false statement doesn't make it true Thomas.  

 

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

I see no reason to ban that which we do not like

---

So do I, but I see a reason to hide porn from minors and to seperate virtual worlds with and without porn content to save the latter from stigma and growth limit.

---

I see no reason to hide porn from minors.    Is there anyone in this thread who didn't see porn when they were a minor?  (I'd be surprised)    Heck, we had a XXX out-door drive-in near where I lived, and people could see the screen from the country roads.  *laughing*    

If parent's don't want their children to see porn, then they need to keep them off the Internet, away from stores, away from friends, and well...society.   Gee, that sounds healthy. 

I don't see any stigma.  I think that the articles written about porn and SL only helped it!  Hell, LL couldn't buy free press that good.  As for growth, the porn helped that too. 

As for separate worlds....that's not a real world then Thomas, but a fake Disneyland.   You want that?  Well, I don't. 

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

 It doesn't seem to me a law that can achieve anything very much.   It certainly can't protect underaged Germans in any way.

---

Only because of stupid laws elsewhere.

What is the situation with direct banking accounts in the US, can these also be created by simply lying when pressing a button?

---

 

I have no idea.   I'm a Brit, not an American.    I would be surprised, though, since, quite apart from whatever legislation may be in place, banks have an obvious and direct financial interest in not opening accounts for people without carrying out quite stringent checks about their identity.  Failing so to do would put the banks at risk of being victims of fraud.

In any case, what's the connection between creating bank accounts and Germany passing apparently meaningless and enforceable laws?

I ask again.   When German legislators passed this particular law, they must have realised that it wouldn't stop German teens from watching porn hosted in servers based elsewhere in the EU, let alone anywhere else.    Did not the question of what the law was supposed to achieve arise in debates at all?

 

 

 

[kiramanell]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

Wrong. SL would not be allowed to run on German servers. You won't find a porn site running on German servers without a rigid age verification system.

 

 

---

And what would the relevance be in practise? Half the MMO's I've played, I have no idea where their servers are located exactly. And who cares?! is the point. If circumventing rigid German age-verification is as simple as not hosting your business on German soil, then their entire law was just a Null-Gesetz to begin with.

[kiramanell]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

Can you show me an example of a German company that has an effective age verification program?

---

The most common method is called "Postident-Verfahren", which includes showing your identity document at a post office. Direct banks often use it for age verification in Germany. Examples:

http://www.bankofscotland.de/mediaObject/documents/bos/de/downloads/leitfaeden/Postident-Coupon/original/Postident-Coupon.pdf

https://www.volkswagenbank.de/de/privatkunden/kundenservice/hilfe/fragen_Antworten/allgemeines/legitimation.html

http://www.wuestenrotdirect.de/de/bank/service_2/service_3/fragenantwortenneu_2/kontodepoterffnung_1.html?searchresult

---

 

These links are absolutely hilarious! So, you win the argument now, because you've shown that you need valid identification papers in order to open a bank account (and in some instance, a birth certificate as well, when it involves a minor; yes, I speak German). Newsflash: *every* legitimate bank in the world requires that! LOL. And it has absolutely nothing to do, whatso-frikkin'-ever, with online age-verification for gaming.

I LOL-ed again.

P.S. Never try to pull a fast one over Kira.

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

---

Why can't you just input your identification number on a website run by the company?

---

German law doesn't consider this safe enough. Minors often have access to older poeple's documents (parents, friends), and I think I also remember reports about such numbers floating around in the internet.

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

I meant in the same discussion as BDSM, when there's no connection.  You're trying to

make

an association where there is none.

---

It is still a matter of opinion. You think having the person you are supposed to love walk around wearing a sign of submission is fine, I don't.

 

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

It's not my term, it's one used by the general public

---

I never encoutered anyone using "vanilla" for a loving relasionship with both partners at eye level, which doesn't hinder but rather amplifies highly ecstatic experiences by the way. It is obviously a derogative term trying to declare erotic experiences that don't include submissiveness boring.

 

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

all relationships have those elements

---

Not even true concerning non-romantic relashionships. There are friends, colleagues, scholars, states at eye level, and these are always the most fruitful relationships.

 

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

change (switch)

---

That might actually be the least problematic variant, if just practised as an occasional erotic game without always subordinating the same person.

 

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

I see no reason to hide porn from minors.    Is there anyone in this thread who

didn't

see porn when

they

were a minor?

---

I did, and of course I liked some of it - I saw details of a naked woman for the first time in my life - but in hindsight I wish I hadn't seen it then, because it also included things that are typical for porn, that I fortunately could reject because I can't be easily influenced in general, but it made me deeply depressed for quite a while.

 

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

away from stores, away from friends

---

You seem to have strange stores and friends around you.

 

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

As for separate worlds....that's not a real world then

---

It would also be unwise to steer at a virtual world which will be stigmatised as having mainly users that crave desease, death, rainy weather, nose-picking or other aspects of reality that most people find offensive - or at least too private to get associated with in public. So if experience tells such stigmas tend to happen, better seperate it.

 

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

In any case, what's the connection between creating bank accounts and Germany passing apparently meaningless and enforceable laws?

I ask again.   When German legislators passed this particular law, they must have realised that it wouldn't stop German teens from watching porn hosted in servers based elsewhere in the EU, let alone anywhere else.    Did not the question of what the law was supposed to achieve arise in debates at all?

 

---

The banking sites (porn sites that use it also exist) show that real age verification can work. A good law is not meaningless only because it can't be effectively enforced. It can still raise awareness and be  a good example that should be followed by other countries, which would also help international enforcement.