So what changed in the Terms of Service?

[Starberry Passion]

1 minute ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

I mean they do use real world models in video games. Good example is Stellar Blade, they scanned a Korean Models body, to create Eve. 

Shin Jae-eun, that's the Model, I linked

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 minute ago, Madi Melodious said:

How about when I wearing nothing there?  Do I still need this modesty layer if there is nothing there?  I mean the complete lack of private parts, not just alphaed out.

 

Yes, I think that's pretty clear. You must cover those regions, not merely alpha them out or "hide" the offending bits.

 

[Starberry Passion]

1 minute ago, Rowan Amore said:

Well, it's the reverse of what you were showing.  How someone looks is indicative of how.old we THINK they are.  

Okay, but did you read what the person said who I was replying to? There was a reason why I replied to them with that.

[Persephone Emerald]

37 minutes ago, Starberry Passion said:

I agree with this, this is what I was saying, I wouldn't use lolita though because people twisted that word into something else. Lolita is just a fashion style, but so many see it different because it's cute.

Because cuteness is youthful, Westerners usually see it as child, even though it's not child. Many adults in the East just like being cute adults.

The name Lolita comes from a novel in which and older man is attracted to and possibly "seduced" by a 12 year old girl. (The girl looks a little older in the movie version, but she's still a minor.) The cute, child-like clothing style represents an adult emulating a child, so it's bound to be confusing if the avatar looks too young.

[Qie Niangao]

32 minutes ago, Branduff Bisnovat said:

Looking forward to hearing more about these external partners as well as the specifics of these personnel changes. Some specificity on the "ways we can improve" section would be nice too.

They cannot provide details about the personnel changes (unless, I suppose, it's to congratulate somebody on their new promotion), lest they violate some pretty strict HR standards. But I agree that it's a pretty important point that's currently expressed at a nearly content-free level of abstraction. 

I've expressed before my reaction to the Medium post (that for technical and other reasons it lacked all credibility except to those already primed to accept the allegations or otherwise inclined to the conspiratorial), but yeah: to have much effect, more information about the investigation process is going to be needed. Some of us don't need to be convinced of anything, and some will remain unconvinced no matter what,  but I don't think what's been said will be effective convincing many others. I think that's unfortunate, and might be improved upon with a little more procedural detail.

[Crim Mip]

One thing they don't make clear is what will happen with those using avatars made by creators who are no longer on the grid, and therefore won't be updating the AV's they created. I would hope LL doesn't retroactively remove said AV's from the grid.

[Starberry Passion]

Just now, Persephone Emerald said:

The name Lolita comes from a novel in which and older man is attracted to and possibly "seduced" by a 12 year old girl. (The girl looks a little older in the movie version, but she's still a minor.) The cute, child-like clothing style represents an adult emulating a child, so it's bound to be confusing if the avatar looks too young.

When they're saying Lolita, they're talking about the fashion, style of Fashion. But again, I said I wouldn't have used that term.

[Nika Talaj]

39 minutes ago, Madi Melodious said:

The modesty requirement is ridiculous if you are wearing cloths or have nothing under the body.  It breaks years of content and makes the investments in people avatars now worth less

/me tilts head.

If a body supports BOM, and is shaped so that it frequently can be used to represent a child or teen, I assume versions of skins will become available soon with baked-in underwear.  Certainly for bodies marketed as children, but also Maitreya and other commercial bodies that support childlike shapes. 

If a body doesn't allow BOM, and is nomod, then it would be incumbent upon the maker to provide an update with baked-in underwear. If the maker is still active in SL, doing so should be easy.

If you have a child body which is nomod, doesn't support BOM, and the maker is no longer active, then yes, you have a problem.  Is this common?

If/when LL clarifies the definition of "child avatar", it would be good if they also clarified whether furry "cubs" are also child avatars.  Whoever's job it turns out to be to do that, I don't envy them!

 

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, Crim Mip said:

One thing they don't make clear is what will happen with those using avatars made by creators who are no longer on the grid, and therefore won't be updating the AV's they created. I would hope LL doesn't retroactively remove said AV's from the grid.

Its common sense, if they don't login anymore. I think they are fine, but once they log in. They are required to update their avis, to stick to the policy. 

[Madi Melodious]

2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Yes, I think that's pretty clear. You must cover those regions, not merely alpha them out or "hide" the offending bits.

 

I'm not talking about hiding them or alphaing them.  They are detachable.   There is nothing there at all. 

[SynergyOne]

13 minutes ago, Angelina Sinclair said:

breast or butt size; it's a matter of the proportions and how they related to each other that can help you determine if someone is using an underage avatar; intentional or not. It's a hard thing to explain in text only so in the past I gathered material with images and references that artists use for drawing children and teens as well as images clothing designers use to to make clothes. That's where I pulled them from anyway: https://sta.sh/262i8ds0dep

We don't need to worry about the barely 18 types. What we need to worry about are those that sit in the middle between child ava sand adult avas -- the teenagers and minor avatars.

 

 

Except using the ideal female proportions, when you compare to the 7 and 8 foot tall huge AVs these shapes are behind report and banned NOW even before the changes, and the ideal height of 5'8 is TALL compared to world average of 5'2

[Crim Mip]

5 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

Are you a child avatar? If you are, then creators are required to bake on undergarments in those regions. 

So what happens if said creator is no longer around to do updates. Would an individual be allowed to add their own BoM layer underwear or whatever and have that count?

 

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, Madi Melodious said:

I'm not talking about hiding them or alphaing them.  They are detachable.   There is nothing there at all. 

Are you a kid avi with attachable Genitalia? or you talking about an adult avi? You need to be specific. 

 

[Starberry Passion]

Just now, SynergyOne said:

Except using the ideal female proportions, when you compare to the 7 and 8 foot tall huge AVs these shapes are behind report and banned NOW even before the changes, and the ideal height of 5'8 is TALL compared to world average of 5'2

Height wasn't an issue before anything, they shouldn't be able to report you for being 5'2" They shouldn't be able to ban you, before, for even being 5'0" As long as you are adult, you should be fine.

[Persephone Emerald]

41 minutes ago, UnilWay SpiritWeaver said:

Yet another reason for 'mod' furniture.

If it's mod, put in the AVsitter security script, and set access to group. No one can use your furniture unless they're in the group. Done.

Any furniture in my Linden homes has that, or is something I missed finding in my last check (which likely means it's something I don't use and only think of as decor). Sometimes I just edit the AVpos notecard and remove the adult items from the menus. I go back and forth on what kind of content I want in my SL so I'll remove them one week and put them back the next - this why I use the security script as that at least is something I stay consistent on.

I like modifiable furniture too, but remember that people can modify it to add Adult animations too. 

[Sammy Huntsman]

1 minute ago, Crim Mip said:

So what happens if said creator is no longer around to do updates. Would an individual be allowed to add their own BoM layer underwear or whatever and have that count?

 

They would have to find another skin creator. It's common sense dude. 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Persephone Emerald said:

The name Lolita comes from a novel in which and older man is attracted to and possibly "seduced" by a 12 year old girl. (The girl looks a little older in the movie version, but she's still a minor.) The cute, child-like clothing style represents an adult emulating a child, so it's bound to be confusing if the avatar looks too young.

Moreover, one of the more important models for Lolita fashion is "Alice" from Lewis Carroll's novels. Alice's age is not specified, as I recall, but she's very clearly a pre-teen, or just entering puberty.

I have very mixed feelings about Lolita fashion, and about some Japanese Manga and anime in general. I am willing to accept that someone wearing Lolita fashion is not "representing" as a minor, but there is absolutely no doubt that there is an element of infantilization involved: that's a very clear part of the culture. Were I running an Adult venue, I'd feel pretty uncomfortable with some of the Lolita-inspired avis I've seen in SL.

[Sammy Huntsman]

44 minutes ago, UnilWay SpiritWeaver said:

Yet another reason for 'mod' furniture.

If it's mod, put in the AVsitter security script, and set access to group. No one can use your furniture unless they're in the group. Done.

Any furniture in my Linden homes has that, or is something I missed finding in my last check (which likely means it's something I don't use and only think of as decor). Sometimes I just edit the AVpos notecard and remove the adult items from the menus. I go back and forth on what kind of content I want in my SL so I'll remove them one week and put them back the next - this why I use the security script as that at least is something I stay consistent on.

 

Or just buy PG furniture for areas that have Child Avis in it. 

[brodiac90]

Hopefully creators can come up with a way to keep the modesty layer there no matter what skin is used otherwise it's going to make shopping for skins a nightmare. It's hard enough finding decent clothes as it is. 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

4 minutes ago, Madi Melodious said:

I'm not talking about hiding them or alphaing them.  They are detachable.   There is nothing there at all. 

Same applies, I think. You must be wearing visible underwear.

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, brodiac90 said:

Hopefully creators can come up with a way to keep the modesty layer there no matter what skin is used otherwise it's going to make shopping for skins a nightmare. It's hard enough finding decent clothes as it is. 

LL requires child avi skin creators to bake the modesty later right into the skin. 

[JUSTUS Palianta]

And a shopping nightmare is better than banned completely. 

 

[Sammy Huntsman]

1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Same applies, I think. You must be wearing visible underwear.

I wish she wasn't so vague and answered my question if she is a child avatar or not. 

[Kathlen Onyx]

1 hour ago, Orwar said:

   On the whole modesty patch thing .. It feels as if, whilst the rules as written in combination with just a sprinkle of common sense makes it very clear that what you want to get at is 'no effing genitalia on kiddies'. But, also, the rules as written, does not in any way, shape, or form explicitly state that. 

   If it's an 'on the skin layer' thing, well, there's absolutely nothing stopping people from drawing nipples or ahems on a tattoo layer and putting it on top. 

   I'd very much prefer for it to just outright say that any depiction, 2D or 3D, of genitalia (and nipples?) on child avies is not permitted. Be blunt. Leave no wriggle-room. 

   --

   As for Zoobies, which is an entirely different question altogether because of how they aren't 'avatars' - it is my personal, not-so-humble opinion, that those absolutely should be included in the whole 'no bits or pieces' thing of the whole thing. There is absolutely no need for 'anatomically correct' babies/kids/children on SL at all. It isn't for fear of there being a child behind the keyboard of a child avatar that it isn't permitted, it is because it is a virtual depiction of a child, and animesh/prim kiddos are exactly that.

I've never seen a zooby or funsies animesh with anatomically correct genitalia, even males.

[brodiac90]

Just now, Sammy Huntsman said:

LL requires child avi skin creators to bake the modesty later right into the skin. 

That's my point though, there are very little skins specifically designed for children. Most of them are really old. A lot of kids use skins designed for Maitreya but with the flat chest / no genitalia versions. I can't see many creators going to the effort. They just won't make them so you'll be stuck with the default option the avi creator made.