Hypocrites, hypocrites everywhere.

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

English is a fine language, American English is strange.

---

Everything that I don't know or like or approve of is somehow strange and wrong and ought to be forbidden at the penalty of death.

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

---

and its being said again.

there is no reason for child avatars to be in Adult land.

 

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

and its being said again.

there is no reason for child avatars to be in Adult land.

 

---

 

That is for Linden Lab to decide, and they don't seem to share your opinion. You should try and contact them. I'm sure they'll be glad to hear your feedback on this matter.

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

and its being said again.

there is no reason for child avatars to be in Adult land.

 

---

 

That is for Linden Lab to decide, and they don't seem to share your opinion. You should try and contact them. I'm sure they'll be glad to hear your feedback on this matter.

---

i have every right to state my opinion as you do, are you forgetting that this is a forum?

do you think paedophiles are ok? i don't.

if you don't, you should agree that child avatars have no place on adult rated land.

 

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

and its being said again.

there is no reason for child avatars to be in Adult land.

 

---

 

That is for Linden Lab to decide, and they don't seem to share your opinion. You should try and contact them. I'm sure they'll be glad to hear your feedback on this matter.

---

i have every right to state my opinion as you do, are you forgetting that this is a forum?

do you think paedophiles are ok? i don't.

if you don't, you should agree that child avatars have no place on adult rated land.

 

---

You can state your opinion all day long for all I care, but the simple fact remains that the people who run this platform have a different opinion. If you want them to do it your way, you'll have to take this discussion to the Labsters.

PS: Do you think that eating cats is ok? If you don't, you have to agree that cats shouldn't be allowed to come anywhere near a kitchen or a dinner table.

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

and its being said again.

there is no reason for child avatars to be in Adult land.

 

---

 

That is for Linden Lab to decide, and they don't seem to share your opinion. You should try and contact them. I'm sure they'll be glad to hear your feedback on this matter.

---

i have every right to state my opinion as you do, are you forgetting that this is a forum?

do you think paedophiles are ok? i don't.

if you don't, you should agree that child avatars have no place on adult rated land.

 

---

You can state your opinion all day long for all I care, but the simple fact remains that the people who run this platform have a different opinion. If you want them to do it your way, you'll have to take this discussion to the Labsters.

PS: Do you think that eating cats is ok? If you don't, you have to agree that cats shouldn't be allowed to come anywhere near a kitchen or a dinner table.

---

thats a stupid analogy and you know it.

 

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

 

do you think paedophiles are ok? i don't.

if you don't, you should agree that child avatars have no place on adult rated land.

---

PS: Do you think that eating cats is ok? If you don't, you have to agree that cats shouldn't be allowed to come anywhere near a kitchen or a dinner table.

---

thats a stupid analogy and you know it.

---

 

I know It almost rivals your own slippery slope argument in that regard, but not quite. For my argument to be as irrational as yours, I'd have to restate it with neko avatars, virtual kitchens and prim tables.

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

 

do you think paedophiles are ok? i don't.

if you don't, you should agree that child avatars have no place on adult rated land.

---

PS: Do you think that eating cats is ok? If you don't, you have to agree that cats shouldn't be allowed to come anywhere near a kitchen or a dinner table.

---

thats a stupid analogy and you know it.

---

 

I know

It almost rivals your own slippery slope argument in that regard. (For my argument to be as irrational as yours, I'd have to restate it with neko avatars, virtual kitchens and prim tables).

---

problem is you can't offer some kind of answer to my question, all you can do is offer sarcasm.

why should child avatars be on Adult rated land?

it would be easy enough for them to act and dress appropriately.

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

problem is you can't offer some kind of answer to my question, all you can do is offer sarcasm.

why should child avatars be on Adult rated land?

it would be easy enough for them to act and dress appropriately.

---

I've stated Linden Lab's policy, which is not necessarily my own opinion. I think the Lab's rationale is that not all adult places host sexual content. There are residential areas built by people who have no interest in sexual role play, and whose sole reason to live on adult land is to make sure that they only interact with age-verified adults.

Other places have an adult rating because they host violent but non-sexual content, and there is no reason whatsoever for Linden Lab to ban child avatars from violent (i.e. combat or horror related) activities. The only places that child avatars are prohibited from entering are those that feature sexual activities, and that is enough to satisfy US legislators. Why should LL restrict their customers more than they absolutely have to?

[Ishtara Rothschild]

But you already knew all that, don't you? It's your prerogative to disagree with LL's decisions and rant about them in the forums, over and over again. I only think that you're kidding yourself if you expect your rants to have any effect on LL's policies. That's why I'd suggest that you take it up with the Lindens. I'm sure they'll be thrilled to read the opinion of such a valued customer as yourself.

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

problem is you can't offer some kind of answer to my question, all you can do is offer sarcasm.

why should child avatars be on Adult rated land?

it would be easy enough for them to act and dress appropriately.

---

I've stated Linden Lab's policy, which is not necessarily my own opinion. I think the Lab's rationale is that not all adult places host sexual content. There are residential areas built by people who have no interest in sexual role play, and whose sole reason to live on adult land is to make sure that they only interact with age-verified adults.

Other places have an adult rating because they host violent but non-sexual content, and there is no reason whatsoever for Linden Lab to ban child avatars from violent (i.e. combat or horror related) activities. The only places that child avatars are prohibited from entering are those that feature sexual activities, and that is enough to satisfy US legislators. Why should LL restrict their customers more than they absolutely have to?

---

surely depictions of children and violence are as bad as depictions of children and sex.

i cant change LLs opinion, this isnt the right place to do it, and i'm not seeking to.

i am seeking to appeal  to adult land owners to ban child avatars from their land for the right reasons.

can you honestly see a problem with that?

ps. child avatars are not prohibited from places that feature sexual activities, they are just not allowed to partake of such activities.

so from what i understand of the TOS is fine for a child avatar to "watch".

not a nice thought eh?

and imagine the movies that could be made quite legally?

would you seriously condone that kind of behaviour?

 

 

 

 

[Void Singer]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

proof please.

i know all about land ratings TY,  but why should a child avatar be on adult rated land where anything goes?

for what reason? what possible justification?

i feel you are obfusticating the issue.

---

 read it for yourself, the fact is illegal activities have always been banned, whether specifically named or not.

and apparently you don't know about land ratings otherwise you wouldn't have said that... anything does NOT go, only what the land owner allows, within the limits of the land rating, as long as it's within TOS, period.... whether anyone likes it or not. heavens know I'd love to see an end to dolcett, but it's legal

PS

for those that don't know what dolcett is, I don't suggest googling it, but if you do, very NSFW

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Void Singer wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

proof please.

i know all about land ratings TY,  but why should a child avatar be on adult rated land where anything goes?

for what reason? what possible justification?

i feel you are obfusticating the issue.

---

 read it for yourself, the fact is illegal activities have always been banned, whether specifically named or not.

and apparently you don't know about land ratings otherwise you wouldn't have said that... anything does NOT go, only what the

land owner

allows,

within

the limits of the land rating, as long as it's

within

TOS, period.... whether anyone likes it or not. heavens know I'd love to see an end to dolcett, but it's legal

PS

for those that don't know what dolcett is, I don't suggest googling it, but if you do, very NSFW

---

you know as well as i do about why the land is zoned as it is, land owners can't allow sex or explicit violence on G rated land can they?

people rent adult rated land because they want the freedoms that go with it.

i know about Land Ratings, perhaps you are the one who needs to research a little more and examine its implications.

i agree with you about Dolcett btw.

 

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

surely depictions of children and violence are as bad as depictions of children and sex.

---

Do you think Stephen King should be behind bars for writing "Children of the Corn"? And Carrie, Pet Cemetary, and many other violent horror stories that feature child protagonists? Even Dicken's Oliver Twist is fairly violent. Not to mention Shakespeare's body of work 

 

---

 i cant change LLs opinion, this isnt the right place to do it, and i'm not seeking to.

i am seeking to appeal  to adult land owners to ban child avatars from their land for the right reasons.

can you honestly see a problem with that?

---

I can assure you that I rigorously ban child avatars from my sim. Because my sim features explicit sexual content, not merely because it is adult rated.

So yes, I can see the (legal) problem with child avatars in sex-themed sims. But I personally have no problem with child avis hanging out at adult-rated infohubs where Linden Lab forbid sexual activities, or in any other adult area that doesn't contain anything sexual.

 

---

 ps. child avatars are not prohibited from places that feature sexual activities, they are just not allowed to partake of such activities.

so from what i understand of the TOS is fine for a child avatar to "watch".

not a nice thought eh?

---

Child avatars are also forbidden to be in close proximity to sexual content. A child avi standing next to an occupied sex bed, or in the middle of a BDSM club, is as much of a banable offense as a child avatar involved in sexual ageplay.

It is also against LL's policies to feature child avatars in a nude or otherwise sexualized manner, which might as well happen in moderate or general regions. Legislators are concerned with situational context, not with Linden Lab's land maturity ratings. That's why LL also judge based on context and don't outright ban child avis from adult land.

As for watching: Sure, child avatars can cam across parcel and sim borders and see what's going on in sex-themed areas. But where is the harm in that, considering that those who are able to enter moderate and adult regions are, in fact, age-verified adults? The only legal concern is the depiction of child-like characters in a sexual situation or sex-themed environment.

 

---

and imagine the movies that could be made quite legally?

would you seriously condone that kind of behaviour? 

---

I assume you're talking about machinima? In that case, there are two possible situations:

1.) The machinima video features both sexual content and child avatars in the same scene, which is illegal in the USA as well as other countries. This is actually exactly what the ban of sexual ageplay is all about. The likeness of a child combined with anything sexual, in the same image or movie scene, is illegal. Nothing else regarding 3D renditions of children is legally prohibited and needs to be banned.

2.) The operator of a child avatar cams across a sim border and films adult looking avatars in a sexual situation. Seeing that this hypothetical child avatar has to be age-verified in order to cam into adult sims, and that the operator behind the avatar can access all kinds of pornography outside of SL, I don't see why this would be grounds for concern.

In other words, those children aren't really children and don't need to be protected from adult content. Only Linden Lab need to protect themselves, namely from people who produce images or machinima that RL courts would judge to be virtual child porn. 

[Void Singer]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

you know as well as i do about why the land is zoned as it is, land owners can't allow sex or explicit violence on G rated land can they?

people rent adult rated land because they want the freedoms that go with it.

i know about Land Ratings, perhaps you are the one who needs to research a little more and examine its implications.

i agree with you about Dolcett btw.

---

seems I know better why land is zoned the way it is.... there are plenty of people that own adult land specifically so they don't have to associate with unverified accounts... and yet aren't doing anything that is "adult" in nature on their land...  land ratings are a maximum on allowable content, not a requirement that materials be at that level, and frequently aren't.

just because you can does a thing, does me mean you must.

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

 

---

 i cant change LLs opinion, this isnt the right place to do it, and i'm not seeking to.

i am seeking to appeal  to adult land owners to ban child avatars from their land for the right reasons.

can you honestly see a problem with that?

---

I can assure you that I rigorously ban child avatars from my sim. Because my sim features explicit sexual content, not merely because it is adult rated.

So yes, I can see the (legal) problem with child avatars in sex-themed sims. But I personally have no problem with child avis hanging out at adult-rated infohubs where Linden Lab forbid sexual activities, or in any other adult area that doesn't contain anything sexual.

 

---

 ps. child avatars are not prohibited from places that feature sexual activities, they are just not allowed to partake of such activities.

so from what i understand of the TOS is fine for a child avatar to "watch".

not a nice thought eh?

---

Child avatars are also forbidden to be in close proximity to sexual content. A child avi standing next to an occupied sex bed, or in the middle of a BDSM club, is as much of a banable offense as a child avatar involved in sexual ageplay.

It is also against LL's policies to feature child avatars in a nude or otherwise sexualized manner, which might as well happen in moderate or general regions. Legislators are concerned with situational context, not with Linden Lab's land maturity ratings. That's why LL also judge based on context and don't outright ban child avis from adult land.

As for watching: Sure, child avatars can cam across parcel and sim borders and see what's going on in sex-themed areas. But where is the harm in that, considering that those who are able to enter moderate and adult regions are, in fact, age-verified adults? The only legal concern is the depiction of child-like characters in a sexual situation or sex-themed environment.

 

---

and imagine the movies that could be made quite legally?

would you seriously condone that kind of behaviour? 

---

I assume you're talking about machinima? In that case, there are two possible situations:

1.) The machinima video features both sexual content and child avatars in the same scene, which is illegal in the USA as well as other countries. This is actually exactly what the ban of sexual ageplay is all about. The likeness of a child combined with anything sexual, in the same image or movie scene, is illegal. Nothing else regarding 3D renditions of children is legally prohibited and needs to be banned.

2.) The operator of a child avatar cams across a sim border and films adult looking avatars in a sexual situation. Seeing that this hypothetical child avatar has to be age-verified in order to cam into adult sims, and that the operator behind the avatar can access all kinds of pornography outside of SL, I don't see why this would be grounds for concern.

In other words, those children aren't really children and don't need to be protected from adult content. Only Linden Lab need to protect themselves, namely from people who produce images or machinima that RL courts would judge to be virtual child porn. 

---

of course its illegal but SL is the perfect place to make such movies, just because its illegal doesnt mean it couldnt or doesn't happen does it?

one would have to be extrememely naive to to think these things dont go on in SL because LL say they cant.

ps im not sure about your definition of "proximity" i think "actively involved" is key here.

i know children arent real children in SL (most of them anyway) and i know you probably dont have huge ears and blue hair

nevertheless thats how you portray yourself and im sure its real enough to you at the time.

[Void Singer]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

of course its illegal but SL is the perfect place to make such movies, just because its illegal doesnt mean it couldnt or doesn't happen does it?[...]

---

 and nothing you suggested wouldn't stop that either, regardless of land rating, or account type... that can only be dealt with by reporting it and letting LL hand off the information to law enforcement, which I can assure you that they are more than happy to do.

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Void Singer wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

of course its illegal but SL is the perfect place to make such movies, just because its illegal doesnt mean it couldnt or doesn't happen does it?[...]

---

 and nothing you suggested wouldn't stop that either, regardless of land rating, or account type... that can only be dealt with by reporting it and letting LL hand off the information to law enforcement, which I can assure you that they are more than happy to do.

---

but it would represent a start in the right direction, cant have brothels on mature land can you?

paedos  will of course get around things just like the paedos in RL do but can you seriously say its not a good idea to limit child avs to G rated land?

ps they can always change avs eh? they are not stuck in a childs body..

 

[Deltango Vale]

Doesn't anyone ever get bored of this topic?

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Deltango Vale wrote:

Doesn't anyone ever get bored of this topic?

---

i guess some do and some dont.

 

[Ayrea]

umad?

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Ayrea wrote:

umad?

---

nope, but i sure hate paedophiles.

[Marianne McCann]

---

Deltango Vale wrote:

Doesn't anyone ever get bored of this topic?

---

Ages ago.

[Void Singer]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

but it would represent a start in the right direction, cant have brothels on mature land can you?

---

no it wouldn't, you can have Disneyland on adult land if you want. A != B

---

[...] can you seriously say its not a good idea to limit child avs to G rated land?

---

yes, I can seriously say that, because as a land owner I can choose to define lower limits for whats allowed on my land, and choose to put that on adult land if I want to filter out accounts that can't access it.

---

ps they can always change avs eh? they are not stuck in a childs body..

---

and you can always choose not to do business at places you object to. But so long as they don't violate law or TOS, it's not your place to say, nor mine, regardless how offended we are by it.

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Void Singer wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

but it would represent a start in the right direction, cant have brothels on mature land can you?

---

no it wouldn't, you can have Disneyland on adult land if you want. A != B

---

[...] can you seriously say its not a good idea to limit child avs to G rated land?

---

yes, I can seriously say that, because as a land owner I can choose to define lower limits for whats allowed on my land, and choose to put that on adult land if I want to filter out accounts that can't access it.

---

ps they can always change avs eh? they are not stuck in a childs body..

---

and you can always choose not to do business at places you object to. But so long as they don't violate law or TOS, it's not your place to say, nor mine, regardless how offended we are by it.

---

but you wouldnt have disneyland in adult land would you, unless you were stupid.

 

this is a forum, its my right to express my opinion, you have no right to even try to tell me where my place is.