So what changed in the Terms of Service?

[Kathlen Onyx]

7 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Clearly we went to very different parties as teenagers.

OH ok, you wore a lace bralette at age 12. Yes, clearly I was still playing with barbies then.

[MissSweetViolet]

8 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I've been reimbursed in Imvu a few times for content I purchased that was later revoked for use on the platform there.

I'm glad someone does, I wish that was my general experience, but sadly no. if SL did that it would be great though!

[Coffee Pancake]

5 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said:

OH ok, you wore a lace bralette at age 12. Yes, clearly I was still playing with barbies then.

I wasn't a teenager when I was 12.

[Arielle Popstar]

1 minute ago, MissSweetViolet said:

I'm glad someone does, I wish that was my general experience, but sadly no. if SL did that it would be great though!

Well it is and it isn't because from what I read one time in their forums was that Imvu reimbursed but took the funds out of the Creators account who made and sold it. The credits were nice but I hated to think how it must have impoverished the creator to pay that all back.

[Denim Robonaught]

6 hours ago, UnilWay SpiritWeaver said:

Maybe just rethink the idea of mixing adult content and child avatars. It was never a good idea to begin with even if it was allowed.

Having an adult platform at 3000 meters and a residential area on the ground is not mixing content

[MissSweetViolet]

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Well it is and it isn't because from what I read one time in their forums was that Imvu reimbursed but took the funds out of the Creators account who made and sold it. The credits were nice but I hated to think how it must have impoverished the creator to pay that all back.

Ah, that's not as nice.

[Sylwia Obolensky]

ban all child avatars

[Pixie Kobichenko]

34 minutes ago, MissSweetViolet said:

Why should we be forced

To cut down on potential disturbing activities?  Cause leaving things unaddressed apparently ain’t working?  
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 
At some point the greater good outweighs individual inconvenience.  

[MissSweetViolet]

Just now, Pixie Kobichenko said:

To cut down on potential disturbing activities?  Cause leaving things unaddressed apparently ain’t working?  
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 
At some point the greater good outweighs individual inconvenience.  

I think that's what this whole announcement is, addressing that.

Also worth pointing out most child avatars don't cause issues. The more problematic ones are the ones who skirt between teen/adult.

[Jaylinbridges]

I am only on Page 8 of this topic, and will get thru all the comments when I have time, in days I think.   But this is going to make life difficult for many avatar and clothing designers, trying to satisfy this new "modesty" rule.  Apparently it is retroactive too - so if you bought a teen avatar in the last 15 years, you are probably now illegal if you don't have an opaque  not removable underwear layer on your skin.   Here are some currently for sale Teen Series avatars with clothing.  All will need to be modified now, which will likely kill any future sales.  BTW under 18 is a child, according to the laws.  You can join the Army and put your life at stake at 17, but you can't get naked to shower, in SL. 

 

[Denim Robonaught]

6 hours 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

6 hours ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

You have until June 30th to obtain a skin or body (?) with a built-in modesty layer, according to the FAQ.

Depending on the body you use, I imagine that content will get made fairly quickly (we can hope?).

So basically any child avi's 10,000s of L$s worth of skins, and bodies are now completely useless because they can't be censored, unless they bring out special bodies that censor every baked skin. I'd call that punishment for being a child avi.

 

[Kathlen Onyx]

16 minutes ago, MissSweetViolet said:

I think that's what this whole announcement is, addressing that.

Also worth pointing out most child avatars don't cause issues. The more problematic ones are the ones who skirt between teen/adult.

Well TBF, do you know most child avatars? I'm sure you don't hang around the ones that skirt between teen/adult.

Obviously  LL saw this as a problem enough to address it more firmly now.  Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[Persephone Emerald]

2 hours ago, Chaser Zaks said:

Well it is from 2005. Doesn't have to have exactly what this has, I just went with period correct avatars because I had period correct undergarmets for them. (Actual teen grid stuff! It's in the "character" folder named underpants_trial_male.tga, underpants_trial_male.tga, undershirt_trial_female.tga)

As the name implies, Trial Second Life users couldn't remove them, nor could residents on the Teen Grid.

They found work-arounds though.

[AdoraMaymistStory]

I have been a child avatar in SL for over eight years.

I dress like a kid. I wear BOM (before that Omega). I respect TOS.

It is sad, in my opinion that a problem which has not been created by or a representation of the views and actions of the child avatar community in Second Life (a longstanding and vast community not to mention major contributor to that economy) may be made potentially worse and make our time in-world more challenging. Glitches happen. Landmarks change.

I go to G-rated and Moderate sims all the time where there are half naked "Adults" with no underclothing. I don't consider policing them or other avatars because like me, behind the screen they are (hopefully) an adult.

The changes to TOS may seem benign but could create a lot of issues for good creators, our autonomy and transactions past and present. Also encouraging camming on avatars that resemble a child's body.

Folks should get their head out of the gutter and mind their own business. Child avatars are not second class citizens of Governor Linden's pixelated corner of the Metaverse.

We are a reason it has evolved and always will be.

Edited May 3 by AdoraMaymistStory

[Coffee Pancake]

1 minute ago, Kathlen Onyx said:

Well TBF, do you know most child avatars?

Obviously  LL saw this as a problem enough to address it more firmly now.  Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

No the medium article that made unfounded and sweeping accusations in a vain attempt to do as much damage as possible while naming members of staff. All the "evidence" was at best fake, at worst 8 - 10 years old.

SL's general child avatars had nothing to do with this, please don't imagine all the terrible things they might get up to.

[Ayashe Ninetails]

2 minutes ago, Denim Robonaught said:

So basically any child avi's 10,000s of L$s worth of skins, and bodies are now completely useless because they can't be censored, unless they bring out special bodies that censor every baked skin. I'd call that punishment for being a child avi.

That's what it looks like to me, unfortunately. I do think, if your body can support third-party skins, the skin itself could satisfy the requirement, but this all relies on creators changing up their store offerings to comply with the rules either way. New skins and bodies may get made, but it's a waiting game.

One thing you could do in the meantime is reach out to creators you've bought from in the past to make sure they know about the changes ASAP. It'll take time for new content to start rolling out and the faster they hear of this, the better.

I'm sorry you'll be losing so much content. That really is unfortunate. ❤️

[SpiritSparrow Skydancer]

 

 

[Extrude Ragu]

32 minutes ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

At some point the greater good outweighs individual inconvenience.

Putting aside child avs for a moment. I've always thought this way of thinking is really evil. I've known people in my life who have said similar things, and it has always been to justify something really cruel and unfair carried out to somebody who didn't deserve it.

[Kathlen Onyx]

9 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

No the medium article that made unfounded and sweeping accusations in a vain attempt to do as much damage as possible while naming members of staff. All the "evidence" was at best fake, at worst 8 - 10 years old.

SL's general child avatars had nothing to do with this, please don't imagine all the terrible things they might get up to.

I actually don't know whether they do or not to tell the truth. The only child avatar I've interacted with on a daily basis is one that calls herself a dolly and has a wind up attachment. Still a child avatar in my mind.  

I really do feel badly for what LL is expecting.  I personally feel that BOM underwear and panties should be enough as long as there are clothes on top of them because people can't derender them.  I do feel that it's a huge burden on both the community and the creators.  It seems though that they used the hammer to the max rather than trying to go the least invasive.  

Perhaps this thread will change the path LL has taken and have them back off a bit once they see how disrupting it really can be.  As far as the other things I've said in this thread, I still stand by it.

If LL thinks that a modesty layer is going to stop the behavior they are mistaken.  Most of my adult activities are done in IM with emoting and cuddling on a couch.

Edited May 3 by Kathlen Onyx

[Persephone Emerald]

2 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Aside from the idea that one comes to SL to relax from RL, not have to be aware of even more rules and regulations that are added on a Linden whim. It has reached a point for some, (like me) where it has just become too aggravating and stressful to continue going inworld.

What? You mean going inworld is more stressful than being on the forums?

[Pixie Kobichenko]

Just now, Extrude Ragu said:

Putting aside child avs for a moment. I've always thought this way of thinking is really evil. I've known people in my life who have said similar things, and it has always been to justify something really cruel and unfair carried out to somebody who didn't deserve it.

No doubt that holds true in many scenarios.  
I am thinking along the lines of things we aren’t allowed to discuss here that I can’t hold up as examples since they pertain to realworldland .  
- as a sidenote the evil townsfolk in Hot Fuzz justify offing their fellow citizens they view as problematic for “the greater good”.  

 

[Kathlen Onyx]

I really don't know how they are going to get the word out.  I just told a friend of mine I was discussing this topic on the forum and she had no clue what I was talking about. She's been in SL 13 years.  She clicked to accept the TOS but, of course, didn't read it at all.  I suspect most of the SL community is going to be clueless about the new TOS and what they need to do.

If LL is really serious then they need to find a way to have what changed in your face so people know.  Otherwise, it's simply a disclaimer so they don't get in trouble.

Edited May 3 by Kathlen Onyx

[MissSweetViolet]

29 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said:

Well TBF, do you know most child avatars? I'm sure you don't hang around the ones that skirt between teen/adult.

Obviously  LL saw this as a problem enough to address it more firmly now.  Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I hang around a couple of kid communities, and I've never even remotely seen them do anything inappropriate while I was there. I also don't know most adult avatars, but I assume most of them follow the rules as well.

I have seen these communities have to ban some adult avatars who came in dressed inappropriate last year, it was enough of an issue that they had to make a pop up to warn adults tp ing in to be dressed pg or be banned from the sim.

I don't hang around the skirting ones, but I have seen enough of them around, and the "daddy/babygirl" merchandise is all over certain shops, take a glance at the sales page for SoKawaiiSunday for a few weeks.

Coffee is right, the article that shall not be named did most of this. I read that in full, and saw nothing in it that couldn't be easily faked, whether it was or not is not my job to figure out, but the whole setup of it didn't sit right with me, I can say that, and the site removed it for violation, so there you go. While I have no doubt that stuff like that goes on, it's by no means the majority I feel quite confident of that.

Edited May 3 by MissSweetViolet
Spelling corrections.

[Stephanie Misfit]

33 minutes ago, Jaylinbridges said:

I am only on Page 8 of this topic, and will get thru all the comments when I have time, in days I think.   But this is going to make life difficult for many avatar and clothing designers, trying to satisfy this new "modesty" rule.  Apparently it is retroactive too - so if you bought a teen avatar in the last 15 years, you are probably now illegal if you don't have an opaque  not removable underwear layer on your skin.   Here are some currently for sale Teen Series avatars with clothing.  All will need to be modified now, which will likely kill any future sales.  BTW under 18 is a child, according to the laws.  You can join the Army and put your life at stake at 17, but you can't get naked to shower, in SL. 

 

None of those avatars look remotely like teens, they are all full grown men.

[Persephone Emerald]

1 hour ago, Kathlen Onyx said:

You keep referring to RL where there is no **play in someone's home, hopefully.   While I appreciate all the RL scenario's that are not adult or sexually related unfortunately it's obviously not the case here.

Yeah, but if someone were playing a child avatar they might want to take a bath - or not take a bath, and then run naked around the house. It seems to me that forcing clothing or modesty layers onto all the child avatars is really infringing on their roleplay options, when the vast majority of them are behaving innocently.