So what changed in the Terms of Service?

[Rowan Amore]

10 minutes ago, Nika Talaj said:

What? This is all LL says about the modesty layer in their "clarifications" page.  I don't see any further description in the FAQ.

I see no requirement that the skin be made by the creator of the body.  Just that a modesty layer be baked into whatever skin a child avatar is using.   As I read this, the modesty layer must be part of the skin, not a separate BOM garment that the avatar could remove to become nude.  Every skin that a child avatar uses must have a modesty layer; if they use a skin that does not, they are not in compliance.

That's my understanding, too.  A skin can not be removed but can be replaced.  If I replace it, as a non-adult character to an adult skin, same body, same shape, I'd be in violation.

 

5 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Actually .. this has just been brought to my attention,

Maitreya (and other adult bodies) have geometry based sexual characteristics. Making a child avatar with that body isn't possible as the body itself violates the rules.

Does this mean that anyone wearing Maitreya could not be considered an child avatar and is therefore .. safe ?

That can be removed using the BOM layers, IIRC.  It smoothes out that area so BOM doesn't look as if you have a wedgie.  With a BoM skin with modesty and that function enabled, there would be no definition to.that area.

ETA...on my Reborn,.I can get rid of those characteristics via.the HUD.  Not that I'd use reborn for a non-adult avatar.

Edited May 2 by Rowan Amore

[Innula Zenovka]

24 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Well how about the Lab/ Viewer notifies someone if they are entering an adult area? The Lab likes to put the onus on the resident rather lifting a hand themselves to help alleviate that possibility.

It does already -- set your preferences thus:

and when you try to go to an Adult area you see this

Edited May 2 by Innula Zenovka

[Lilbap]

Hi first post, nice to meet you all even if this is a horrible time to be a kid in SL.

 

So, if the Lindens are here listening, please SHOW us what a "modesty layer" is upposed to look like? I mean, I just put black censor bars over my bits baked onto the skin I have. Is that a modesty layer? How about solid examples as opposed to just vague requests.

[LittleMe Jewell]

32 minutes ago, Cristiano Midnight said:

The thing is though, even in that answer, it does not address this question. If the child avatar is not naked, and is fully covered, does it matter that there is no modesty layer on an alphaed out part of a body?

To you and me, NO.  To LL, it sounds like it does matter.  

They seem to want to completely remove the ability for a child avatar to ever show nipples/genitals.  That seems to be the critical part.

However, that critical part will still only ever apply to avatars that are using an obvious child avatar, rather than someone that is simply a 15-17 yr old teen.

[Lilbap]

1 minute ago, Innula Zenovka said:

It does already -- set your preferences thus:

and when you try to go to an Adult area you see this

 

But now setting your viewer to be all of them is how you show you're an adult. Do we now need to unregister being an adult?

[Nika Talaj]

32 minutes ago, AmeliaJ08 said:

AVI(L) clothes are rigged for AVI(L), as far as I know there is no compatibility with any other body?

The problem this user has is they specifically cannot comply with the rules as stated (from what I can understand, there is confusion over this rule - does it only apply if a child avatar wishes to appear completely nude?). The body uses a non-standard UV apparently so new skins cannot be created, the creator is no longer in SL so the body cannot be updated with any sort of built in solution...

Exactly, the body cannot be updated, so since no one is making skins for it anymore, unfortunately she's right, it's a lost cause. 

But clothes rigged for one body can be worn by anyone, and since many AVI(L) clothes appear to be fitmesh, obviously the AVI(L) body was rigged to the usual SL human skeleton.  If Madi were to change bodies,  old fitmesh clothes she has may work as well with the new body.  And some of the clothes rigged for AVI(L) might work as well; she could try it using  a demo of a new body, particularly if she chooses one with a good alpha HUD. 

My male alt has never bought any clothes for the actual freebie body he wears, usually either Jake or Gianni clothes work.

[Kathlen Onyx]

10 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Toddlers (up to around 3-4 yrs old) run around in underwear outside all the time in parts of the US that are very hot & humid.

Toddlers also have parents that watch them and not hundreds of people wanting to sexualize them

[Ayashe Ninetails]

7 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Actually .. this has just been brought to my attention,

Maitreya (and other adult bodies) have geometry based sexual characteristics. Making a child avatar with that body isn't possible as the body itself violates the rules.

Does this mean that anyone wearing Maitreya could not be considered an child avatar and is therefore .. safe ?

Given how many people use Maitreya for teen avies, I'd actually like to see that clarified and added to the FAQ. Can adult bodies be made compliant in some way for teen avatars, are teen avatars at risk if wearing them and flat addons, etc.

[Arielle Popstar]

1 minute ago, Innula Zenovka said:

It does already -- set your preferences thus:

and when you try to go to an Adult area you see this

For a few months a few years ago, my one alt had a GM rating that I couldn't get rid of. It would warn me but not prevent my access to Adult rated land or clubs. Maybe that has changed or been fixed in one or more viewers but to my current knowledge, it doesn't work across the board.

[Vanity Fair]

2 hours ago, 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.

That brings to mind a question I have: can Linden Lab even retroactively remove content from your avatar’s inventory? I’m pretty sure they have to respond if a DMCA request is filed, right? But that might need to be a conversation for another thread.  (I still remember that whole florid DMCA saga against the makers of the Genus head, which turned out to be completely without merit and tossed out after much work and cost by the Genus creator.)

[Innula Zenovka]

Just now, Lilbap said:

But now setting your viewer to be all of them is how you show you're an adult. Do we now need to unregister being an adult?

No, it's nothing to do with your RL age (you've already confirmed you're an adult in First Life when you opened your account).   

All setting the maturity rating in preferences does is what it says: "I want to access content rated ...".  It tells SL what you want to see in search and what kind of regions you want to visit (It's set to G and M by default, when you open a new account).   

[Extrude Ragu]

I do wonder about the anime and also Japanese communities in SL.

I know in my own community we already lost a great deal of people to VR Chat, which is actively marketed towards people who enjoy anime, along with upcoming platforms such as Mikoverse etc people are eyeing up.

I don't think that anime was ever fully embraced in Second Life or really marketted to. We've always just sorta existed in the sidelines and often misunderstood. I fear that a lot of my friends, having had previous experiences with how SecondLife residents from the West tend to react to anime that they will start to see the writing on the wall as the culture changes and simply migrate elsewhere.

This new fear culture combined with the re-introduction of age verification I think will make Second Life very hard to bring new friends into. Nobody wants to play on a platform where they're paranoid to be what they enjoy for fear of offending the wrong person. I fear it may be an era of managed decline for anime in Second Life.

Which is kinda a shame, because Second Life is also just getting close to the point where technologically it could compete with those platforms.

[Innula Zenovka]

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

For a few months a few years ago, my one alt had a GM rating that I couldn't get rid of. It would warn me but not prevent my access to Adult rated land or clubs. Maybe that has changed or been fixed in one or more viewers but to my current knowledge, it doesn't work across the board.

Try it again and see what happens.   I've just switched mine to GM to take those screenshots and back to GMA with no difficulty.

[Starberry Passion]

3 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

Given how many people use Maitreya for teen avies, I'd actually like to see that clarified and added to the FAQ. Can adult bodies be made compliant in some way for teen avatars, are teen avatars at risk if wearing them and flat addons, etc.

I mean, they did say someone was here if we had questions.

[LittleMe Jewell]

6 minutes ago, Lilbap said:

Hi first post, nice to meet you all even if this is a horrible time to be a kid in SL.

 

So, if the Lindens are here listening, please SHOW us what a "modesty layer" is upposed to look like? I mean, I just put black censor bars over my bits baked onto the skin I have. Is that a modesty layer? How about solid examples as opposed to just vague requests.

Yes, LL does need to fully state what is or is not a proper modesty layer.

IMO, a circle covering each breast and a triangle covering the pubes area, both colored to not match the skin, would be sufficient -- and has the bonus of letting the person still wear a bathing suit.

[Kathlen Onyx]

Just now, LittleMe Jewell said:

Yes, LL does need to fully state what is or is not a proper modesty layer.

IMO, a circle covering each breast and a triangle covering the pubes area, both colored to not match the skin, would be sufficient -- and has the bonus of letting the person still wear a bathing suit.

You'd think they'd at least show a picture of what it should look like.

[LittleMe Jewell]

5 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said:

16 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Toddlers (up to around 3-4 yrs old) run around in underwear outside all the time in parts of the US that are very hot & humid.

Toddlers also have parents that watch them and not hundreds of people wanting to sexualize them

This is true. We have already stated that what happens in RL doesn't come in to play here in SL on this topic.  The whole idea is to keep SL "clean".

[Coffee Pancake]

2 minutes ago, Starberry Passion said:

the body, itself, does have characters of adult, but not sexual characteristics, because a body isn't sexual until someone sexualizes it. The body is natural.

But I was talking about this before, it has adult features in every aspect of the bodies, Legacy, Maitreya, Kupra, Reborn and others like it.

Quote

* Wearing genital/sexual attachments including clothing, attachments or HUDs created for and/or worn by child avatars to indicate genitalia, whether visible or not.

I would presume this doesn't only apply to male genitalia or additional parts.

[LittleMe Jewell]

4 minutes ago, Vanity Fair said:

can Linden Lab even retroactively remove content from your avatar’s inventory?

Yes -- back in the day, I had some animations removed.  I'm guessing from a DMCA or copy-botting issue of some sort.

[Starberry Passion]

2 minutes ago, Extrude Ragu said:

I do wonder about the anime and also Japanese communities in SL.

I know in my own community we already lost a great deal of people to VR Chat, which is actively marketed towards people who enjoy anime, along with upcoming platforms such as Mikoverse etc people are eyeing up.

I don't think that anime was ever fully embraced in Second Life or really marketted to. We've always just sorta existed in the sidelines and often misunderstood. I fear that a lot of my friends, having had previous experiences with how SecondLife residents from the West tend to react to anime that they will start to see the writing on the wall as the culture changes and simply migrate elsewhere.

This new fear culture combined with the re-introduction of age verification I think will make Second Life very hard to bring new friends into. Nobody wants to play on a platform where they're paranoid to be what they enjoy for fear of offending the wrong person. I fear it may be an era of managed decline for anime in Second Life.

Which is kinda a shame, because Second Life is also just getting close to the point where technologically it could compete with those platforms.

The reason why is because Second Life is Western and has an older population, there is a reason why a lot of people see most wearing a Maitreya as middle aged, since most of them are middle aged, not a lot of them, but most.

And most middle aged people just happen to not like cartoons, unfortunately. Not very Asian oriented and I wish it was, I want to know more about Asian culture, make more Asian friends, I have Malaysian family myself but I'm not from there, so yeah.

[LittleMe Jewell]

2 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said:

You'd think they'd at least show a picture of what it should look like.

Give us an idea of what they are thinking?  What a concept.

[Vanity Fair]

2 hours ago, Madi Melodious said:

Because that is what it amounts too.   My body is old and I like it.  The maker has left SL so there is no way it will ever comply with the modestly layer.  Basically, i've lost my look, hundreds of hours of work, and hundreds of not thousands of dollars in cloths.

 

This. THIS. 
I understand the need for these changes, but I suspect many people will read through all this and decide, it’s simply not worth the hassle. And then delete their child avatars or, as I have done, given up and made them adult avatars. 

Edited May 2 by Vanity Fair

[Cristiano Midnight]

10 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

To you and me, NO.  To LL, it sounds like it does matter.  

They seem to want to completely remove the ability for a child avatar to ever show nipples/genitals.  That seems to be the critical part.

However, that critical part will still only ever apply to avatars that are using an obvious child avatar, rather than someone that is simply a 15-17 yr old teen.

It seems difficult to enforce if someone is dressed and never naked.

[LittleMe Jewell]

Just now, Cristiano Midnight said:

It seems difficult to enforce if someone is dressed and never naked.

But, what child avatar wants to take the chance.? If some meanie runs around de-rendering clothing on child avatars to see if they are in "modesty" compliance and AR's any that are not - that is not a risk many would want to take.

[MissSweetViolet]

5 hours ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

The Lab could make child Avis a designation like a bot- that you have to register that account & then could automatically put limits on where the user can be. 

Didn't register account?  Account gets locked until resolved.  

Many accounts switch between multiple bodies, so I don't think that's reasonable. 

5 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

The only part of this that surprises me is the "modesty layer" bit; that's going to break a fair amount of content, I'd have thought.

Overall, this is much less Draconian than it could have been. It's going to trigger some complaints, but other than the fact that kid avatars aren't going to be able to run around at nude beaches anymore (which I think is a good thing) or be given "realistic" baths (which . . . maybe is also a good thing), I don't see how this should impede those representing as children overly much.

I think it's a good thing, a child avatar does not need to be nude anyway, I've been using TD Kid as one of the bodies I switch between for years, I have no issue with a coverup enforced.

5 hours ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

I think the person who does this to a child avi should be banned. There is no reason to derender clothing of anyone. 

I agree with this, and I wish it would be made so clothing can't be derendered. If that is something that could be done it would be great. 

4 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Not only useful, but maybe vital in this instance.

LL has GOT to make a real effort to ensure that these new rules are well-publicized. Otherwise, there are going to be a lot of people running around in contravention of them without even knowing it. The most obvious instance is the "modesty layer": in theory, anyone who has agreed to this ToS and is wearing a child avatar without a modesty layer is AR-able.

^This!

4 hours ago, Starberry Passion said:

They shouldn't use an adult body marketed towards adult to make child stuff in the first place. It's marketed towards adults, just like Legacy.

There really is no "teen body" if you were trying to present above the age of 12-13, Tweeniedoo and Tweenster don't do as well above those ages. Hence while a petite body is popular for 13+. And it would be impossible to enforce someone to strictly use a body for any given age range, especially the closer you get to an adult age [has as been show a few times in this thread], how could it be determined?

4 hours 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.

Some one already covered it [Persephone I think?], But the connotation with the word Lolita as something inappropriate comes from the 1955 book Lolita by Russian-American novelist Vladimir Nabokov. It still causes controversy to this day according to my understanding. Pair that with the fact that most people in America, unless they are interested in or knowledgeable about the Japanese fashion culture have no idea what it entails when they hear Lolita in reference to the fashion.

I will note though unrelated, I love the Lolita fashion style! But, also I don't engage in adult activities on any of my avatars adult or child, so haven't had to worry what anyone thought.

3 hours ago, brodiac90 said:

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.

I don't know about teen age, but there are tons of active skin creators for child avis, Flying Bunny, AK, Pity Party, TD themselves, just to name a few. I know Bit at TD is already aware of and trying to figure out the best way to comply with this.

3 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

This is an important question, and I get the impression the answer is no. But I think that answer is wrong. A BOM avatar presents with all BOM layers baked in, it makes no practical difference what's on the skin layer if underwear is baked on top.

If, on the other hand, there are multiple avatar mesh layers, there's a legitimate problem. What gets rendered in a tattoo mesh on top of a skin mesh does not obliterate what's rendered on that skin mesh. IMHO each of those mesh layers should be required to comply with the modesty requirement, however they're individually baked or applier-painted.

(Yeah, it's a bit belt-and-suspenders, but it seems consistent, practical, and enforceable.)

I think the idea is the layer should not be able to be taken off, so it becomes impossible to show as nude. I have no issue with this.

What I would like LL to clarify, is what defines covered. is simply underwear over the groin area sufficient? Or does it need to cover more? I would think just adding underwear would still work with most clothing for the active bodies out there. If this has been mentioned I must have missed it.

2 hours ago, Kathlen Onyx said:

Well right off the bat I found two things that should not be for sale in the MP. This was using just the key word "child"

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/Project-Cosplay-Gothic-Corset-Dress-for-Kemono/15758243

Also this for sure:

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/Lunacorn-BOM-Training-Bras/24289940

I don't really see an issue with the first dress [at least the dress in and of it's self, the anime part is a whole other can of worms that I have mixed feelings on]. On a child that would fit in nicely in Victorian sims.

I don't think the second needs to exist in SL, while it may be normal in real life, I can't think of a single situation where this needs to be RPed in SL, given the nature of SL, there are plenty of other pre teen things that can be RPed instead that wouldn't tow the line.

1 hour ago, Madi Melodious said:

I have a very expensive body for SL, AVIL.  The skins are very expensive as are the cloths.  I've had the body for over 6 years.  The creator left SL last year and didn't share any way to update the body.   I spend close to 100 USD on the body alone.  And as I've said in other posts, I can comply with the spirt but not the letter.  I'm perfectly happy to comply with the spirit if that would be allowed.

 

Sorry to say, but when you buy any avatar especially one that is/becomes unsupported, this is the risk you run. Just like adults had to put up with Slink leaving, and Kalhene Analexa users had to. LL can't plan around broken/unsupported content, in fact I think trying to do so is one thing that has held them back in past endeavors in other areas.

1 hour ago, Nika Talaj said:

I don't understand.  AVI(L) bodies are mesh, and all the clothes I see on marketplace for it are mesh.  Many are old fitmesh clothes.  So, if you bought a new body, particularly one with a good alpha hud, wouldn't most of your mesh clothes work with it?  I get that you don't WANT to change bodies, but ... couldn't doing so work? 

Or were AVI(L) bodies and clothes rigged very oddly?

My understanding is it's not BoM, and only the creator can make skins, so there is no way of meeting the compliance.

1 hour ago, Vanity Fair said:

Store owners have two months to make changes. However, I don’t see ToddleeDoo (for example) bothering to update any older versions of their body skins, and there are probably going to be a lot of SL users that remain ignorant of these changes, and still using older versions of child bodies and skins that (according to the FAQ, I just checked) will be in violation of the policy. 

I have an alt with a ToddleeDoo Kid head and body, which I pull out maybe once or twice a year (I used to use it more often, and in fact I had made arrangements to leave that avatar to someone else in my will).

Bit Bloom of Toddleedoo is currently aware of and trying to figure out how to comply with this [while breaking as little content as possible] It's actually what lead me to check forums, she mentioned it in Discord.

Edited May 2 by MissSweetViolet
Spelling corrections.