Jump to content

Is SL's adult content the next to go ?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 63 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Sapphire Dakota said:

Avatars like this (with fairly good customization and clothing) ... in spaces with 150+ people and no lag ... in large editable and customizable landscapes ... that are 5-10x bigger than a sim (and far more easily landscaped than SLs tools) ... in an environment that looks this good. And sex without poseballs, too :)

The technology is there. This is the work of a only handful of devs, imagine what a team of 40 could accomplish?

1-avatar.thumb.jpg.aaa8c750ba678c117edccb9b8c65fb44.jpg

2-club.jpg

3-island.jpg

4-sim.jpg

5-landscape.jpg

The technology is also here that would allow LL to give region/parcel owners the ability to block people from entry and/or attaching # triangle / # MB texture memory content too, but they aren't going to go that route. They are going for their 5th information campaign, more annoying popups, AKA, "We really mean it this time!" or "One, two, two and a half, two and 13/16...". Jelly dolls still require you to download all the data and load it to memory before they high complexity users turn into sprites.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Sapphire Dakota said:

Avatars like this (with fairly good customization and clothing) ... in spaces with 150+ people and no lag ... in large editable and customizable landscapes ... that are 5-10x bigger than a sim (and far more easily landscaped than SLs tools) ... in an environment that looks this good. And sex without poseballs, too :)

The technology is there. This is the work of a only handful of devs, imagine what a team of 40 could accomplish?

1-avatar.thumb.jpg.aaa8c750ba678c117edccb9b8c65fb44.jpg

2-club.jpg

3-island.jpg

4-sim.jpg

5-landscape.jpg

 

Is that taken in 3DXChat?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And ... OnlyFans pulls a complete U-turn this morning according to The Guardian .. they have an agreement with their payment processors to keep allowing sexually explicit material.

"‚ÄúThank you to everyone for making your voices heard. We have secured assurances necessary to support our diverse creator community and have suspended the planned October 1 policy change. OnlyFans stands for inclusion and we will continue to provide a home for all creators.‚ÄĚ

I knew $400 million profit per year had some pull. ;)

OnlyFans scraps plans to ban sexually explicit material | Technology | The Guardian

Yes, 3dxchat, btw.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

gYAxoyV.png

Only now that trust has been broken and the community is mobilized to seek/create/promote alternative platforms.

The moment any corporation finds itself needing to tell customers "we hear you", it's clear they never did and never will, and it's only a matter of time before the next "PR" disaster.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

OnlyFans has reversed its contentious decision to ban sexually explicit content after founder Tim Stokely‚Äôs criticism of ‚Äúunfair‚ÄĚ banks sparked fresh conversations with financial institutions. The company announced on Wednesday that it had ‚Äúsecured assurances necessary to support our diverse creator community and [had] suspended the planned October 1 policy change‚ÄĚ.

Evernote like to Financial Times article because paywall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

gYAxoyV.png

Only now that trust has been broken and the community is mobilized to seek/create/promote alternative platforms.

The moment any corporation finds itself needing to tell customers "we hear you", it's clear they never did and never will, and it's only a matter of time before the next "PR" disaster.

 

It wasn't OnlyFans fault though, they rescinded the decision anyways It's due to bigger financial companies, the banks. So yeah it was kinda out of their hands

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Angelina Sinclair said:

Funny how it took the backlash to spark new conversations about it. I don't buy it. They made a mistake and are throwing the banks under the bus in an attempt to save face and money. lol

 

Um if you read Bank's TOS like Mastercard or Visa, they have very stringent rules on Sexually Explicit content and how they want sites to regulate it. OnlyFans didn't want to, as it would cost money. So they decided to ban the content, until now when they rescinded it and banks are willing to come to the table and talk. Now that being all said, this wouldn't be the case and banks wouldn't have had to update their TOS. Had PornHub had actually regulated their content better. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Angelina Sinclair said:

Funny how it took the backlash to spark new conversations about it. I don't buy it. They made a mistake and are throwing the banks under the bus in an attempt to save face and money. lol

 

I'm not so sure.    Why on earth would OnlyFans voluntarily walk away from porn?  What's in it for them?

In the words of the FT's columnist "LEX", 

Quote

Without porn, OnlyFans would no longer stand out and its business model would unravel. The company takes a 20 per cent cut from payments made by fans. Instagram and Twitter exact no such commissions from tips sent to creators on their sites. Creators of mainstream content would quit OnlyFans once the audience lured there by adult content dispersed. The business needs porn more than it needs banks with strict ESG compliance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Innula Zenovka said:

I'm not so sure.    Why on earth would OnlyFans voluntarily walk away from porn?  What's in it for them?

In the words of the FT's columnist "LEX", 

I think a lot of people just want to make it all Onlyfans fault and basically talk negatively about them. When it had nothing to do with the actual company, but the banks. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we don't yet know, of course, and I hope it doesn't get lost in the news cycle, is what OnlyFans intend to do about making their moderation more effective, since everyone, including OnlyFans, agrees that some clearly unlawful content -- ads for guns and drugs, for example -- wasn't getting removed quickly enough.

That's the inherent problem with sites that depend on content made and uploaded by the public -- it doesn't matter whether you're Facebook, Parler, OnlyFans or the SL Forums, someone's got to moderate it, and that's not always  scalable.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am wondering how many people heard about Only Fans for the first time due to the discussion that resulted from their proposed policy change, and I am wondering if that was the plan the whole time. Get everyone talking about the site by saying you are going to change it, and then suddenly change your mind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only issue that comes to my mind is not only the banks being the problem as others have said no one really mods the content provided on the app itself Example Bell Delphine a YouTube content creator who makes odd videos got banned from only fans do to a video she posted that caused a ruckus to where the app banned her. In this case videos like that are normally the causes of the sudden changes in policies but even if the banks are not wanting to back the company for its workers just like the hub being shut down for many lawsuits the only thing companies can do is set rules and make sure the content creators follow the rules. The hub was out of control with the company refusing to cooperate with victims that is why things are changing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ayeleeon said:

I am wondering how many people heard about Only Fans for the first time due to the discussion that resulted from their proposed policy change, and I am wondering if that was the plan the whole time.

I'd heard there was something called OnlyFans, but I thought it was for sports fans, so I ignored it.

I'm encouraged by this whole affair. Online, and movies with the rise of Disney, have divided into "no sex" and "all sex" products. Few R-rated movies are made now, and those are mostly violence, not sex. It's healthy to see "some sex" re-establishing itself as a product category.

Now if SL can get back on Twitch, maybe with a restriction to G and light M areas only.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Never going to happen. They have been hostile to SL for years.

Twitch bans people for no reason at all look at Dr. Disrespect up on YouTube he is now suing Twitch for banning him since he never really broke any rules on Twitch in his streams don't be surprised if Twitch disappears in a few years.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Ayeleeon said:

I am wondering how many people heard about Only Fans for the first time due to the discussion that resulted from their proposed policy change, and I am wondering if that was the plan the whole time. Get everyone talking about the site by saying you are going to change it, and then suddenly change your mind.

At least according to the Financial Times (who I trust on such matters since, as a senior banking executive once explained to me, the paper's business model depends on its credibility with the people on whom it's reporting), OnlyFans seem to have been victims on their own success during the lockdown:

Quote

OnlyFans‚Äô rapid expansion has compounded its issues with banks, as the company claims to pay more than 1m creators in excess of $300m each month. This increasingly required large financial institutions to act as intermediary banks, helping with transfers between OnlyFans‚Äô bank and the accounts of its creators. ‚ÄúIf you‚Äôre dealing with large sums you need big banks, and they‚Äôre the ones [who fear working with porn companies],‚ÄĚ said one person close to the executives, adding that the company was now ‚Äúbetter off [although] not every institution has come to the table‚ÄĚ.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 63 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...