So what changed in the Terms of Service?

[Qie Niangao]

1 minute ago, Vivienne Schell said:

It takes one hour to paint some black dots onto some skin. Also, BOM layers are not an option. The skin itself must be patched.

Why? That does seem to be what the policy says, but how is that sensible? How can they enforce this, unless they propose to assess the images that went into the baking process, much later when some violation is alleged? Unless I'm missing something, this part seems totally impractical.

[Love Zhaoying]

22 minutes ago, Ingrid Ingersoll said:

There used to be age verification in sl and anyone under 18 was on the teen grid and coudn't go anywhere else. I'm not sure why they dropped it, given the sh** that goes on in sl. Probably lack of bandwidth and not caring too much. 

I find it interesting that (in other recent threads) I saw people say the age verification "does not work" (because people can borrow their parent's card, or a lot of other reasons).  If so, how do we know "any" enforcement works as it should?

I have become cynical about cynicism! HELP!

[Starberry Passion]

I don't think people trying to govern what adults do on adult avatars in an adult sim would help child avatars at all. Some people are trying to push for modesty for adult places, it seems, when it is an adult area on adult land, with adult content.

If you do this, then those enjoying adult life will most likely exit and even more people will quit Second Life. Adults should be able to adult comfortably in adult areas, that's what they were made for. You complaining about adult acts on an adult sim, makes no sense... it's an adult sim

• Mandatory Modesty is General

• Mature - Less Modesty but you still can't go full super saiyan adult.

• Adult sims - No modesty

You want modesty, stay in General you want to be more mature but still have Modesty to where you're not subjected to adulting fully mixed in, Stay in Mature rated sims -

If you go to adult sims, expect adults to be and act like adults.

[Ceka Cianci]

7 hours ago, Drayke Newall said:

When I heard about the latest article that produced all this reaction I wasn't surprised. Whether it was true or not, the fact that it was published didn't surprise me at all especially if you have kept up with LL's issues regarding all of this.

I'm surprised you haven't heard of anything happening to them in the past. Even the 2019 court case where they fired their information security director (for what ever reason - it is irrelevant) and their claims in said case of high ***** numbers every quarter and those offenders simply being able to return. From this article: Second Life Is Plagued by Security Flaws, Ex-Employee Says | WIRED

"Pearlman says that her concerns were only amplified by violations of Second Life’s “*****” rules"

"According to the lawsuit, in 2018 the manager of Linden Lab’s fraud team “presented information to Linden board members in quarterly fraud reports that acknowledged a high number of such ***** [sic] violations were actually occurring on a regular basis each quarter.” The suit says Pearlman “was concerned that Linden Lab was apparently allowing the users to violate ***** rules, by not implementing appropriate procedures to prevent violations from repeating at the same levels each quarter.”

From previous information, this current article isn't an isolated case nor are we talking about a small number of offences.

Trust me. This latest article is not the first time it has been brought up that LL have been ignoring taking preventative action and simply hiding behind their rules. I am not saying what LL should or should do or if they are correct or not but when even their own teams have shown concern in the past it surely means something.

To be honest, I actually have never heard about that court case before that I can remember. I never really seen it discussed in here before and I don't really go looking for news about second life outside of the forums. I just kind of keep everything about second life to the forums and in world and some youtube, as well and shopping things like Seraphim and MP.. But that's about as outside as I get after SLU shut down years ago.

2019 sounds about around the time the genus head was coming out with it's beta, which a lot of my SL at that time was hanging in that group and trying to create some sort of animation hud and hunting down animations that would work with the head, which took forever in a day, as well as helping others with troubleshooting their heads.. So that could be why as well..

2018 I think I was still on a break from SL for what might have been a year maybe longer.. I can't remember really.

I did recently get some information in world which I think was a blog article or something with images and what sounded like someone doing undercover work.. But after reading about half way, it felt very constructed.. Like someone making a thriller or detective story, so I stopped reading about half way.. it just felt too convenient and too well crafted, like they happened to be in the right place at the right time when all of a sudden something  happened or someone popped in.. So I just put it down and went on with my second life because it felt more like propaganda half way through.. To me anyways.. I just figured, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a good chance it might be a duck.. I tried my best to open my eyes while reading it and not let any bias come into it, because it was important in my eyes to do that.

I'm not trying to defend LL or anything like that and I'm not a child avatar hater at all, not of the ones that follow the rules anyways.  I've stood up for them real hard back when the Maturity ratings were changed.. I think Freedom of expression is really important in this world and the real world especially.

All I have been saying is in this thread is about what is happening in the moment with the changes, not what LL should do or could have done.

If I remember right, didn't they say something about doing things in the future back when the CEO's blog post came out on the topic?

Maybe this is just the first step in more steps.. 

All I know is this is where we are at now and nothing more.. hehehe

 

 

 

 

Edited May 3 by Ceka Cianci
Changed the word Maternity to Maturity.. not enough tea in me at the time of posting this. hehehe

[Love Zhaoying]

Making a "modesty layer" shouldn't be that hard.

For example with a body (assume a body creator is adding it to a body):

1. Start with some appropriate underwear.

2. Paint the underwear black.

3. Bake it onto the body.

4. Send out body updates.

Won't the "modesty layer" always show for any existing clothing that is slightly smaller than the modesty layer? For example, a tank top (may show "bra"), or short-shorts (may show underwear).

 

[NicholasTheHufflepuffWizard]

8 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

If it's half a month, either the start time wasn't yesterday, May 3rd, or the end date isn't June 30th, so to what timeline does this refer?

I don't see it especially matters that a particular skin creator meet the timeline anyway. Rather, there needs to be some skin that complies that is preferably somewhat acceptable for use on a child avatar. Ideally, such a "fall back" skin should be distributed for free, until the regular skin creators have time to send out updates to their customers (presumably for free). Earlier I kinda hinted that there might be a Senra child avatar that could be used at least as an example, but such a thing might work temporarily to get through a transition.

There may be some inconvenience and less than ideal conditions for a while (e.g., not each resident's favorite look available immediately), but honestly it's nothing compared to the original Adult Content transition, with Zindra store relocations and Safe Hubs and Adult Search terms and settings and scores of disruptive changes. Some folks not getting their first choice of skin for a few weeks is not the end of the virtual world.

Yeah, this is what seems the sensible approach to me, too. Who cares what the skin texture is as long as the final baked texture is modest? In fact, who can even tell what the lower layers may have looked like, unless they're planning on policing raw image input to the bake servers—and for what purpose? I feel like some attention to the actual mechanics of the enforcement process would result in a clear, simple rule that people could readily follow without difficulty.

For example, as someone else suggested, how about a mandatory alpha mask that must be baked into every (SLUV-based) outfit? Just cover the transparent parts, no skin development necessary.

For the part about the timeline, the reason I originally thought half a month was because of the day the update to policy was sent out. So I was definitely wrong with how long until the enforcement of the modesty rule comes into play.

Realistically, I would think, while many skin creators can get something out that complies with the modesty rule, some may not be able to do it in time. Which I recommended that more time be given, so that there can be breathing room for the task to be done. 

I am glad you agree with my statement about the modesty rule, I feel like that particular part of the updated policy does need some more clarification. Even in its simplicity. 

[Qie Niangao]

1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said:

26 minutes ago, Ingrid Ingersoll said:

There used to be age verification in sl and anyone under 18 was on the teen grid and coudn't go anywhere else. I'm not sure why they dropped it, given the sh** that goes on in sl. Probably lack of bandwidth and not caring too much. 

I find it interesting that (in other recent threads) I saw people say the age verification "does not work" (because people can borrow their parent's card, or a lot of other reasons).  If so, how do we know "any" enforcement works as it should?

I have become cynical about cynicism! HELP!

As I recall, those were two very different age verification processes. There was one that vetted youth for access to the Teen Grid. I don't know what they did for that, but I had the impression parents were involved, or school IDs, or something extremely invasive and labor intensive.

Then, years after that was in place, after the huge scandal that lead to the original Adult Content policy, they introduced this age verification process administered by a third party, Aristotle / Integrity, that went (obviously) the other way: making sure only RL adults could access SL Adult content. Only problem was that it was just absurdly leaky. People routinely verified as Elvis Presley. That's how age verification's reputation of pointlessness was established in SL, and eventually they dropped it because other platforms were using self-reported age as "good enough" for legal purposes.

All that was a long time ago; it's very possible there are more reliable and/or less intrusive verification methods now in common use.

[Starberry Passion]

9 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

To be honest, I actually have never heard about that court case before that I can remember. I never really seen it discussed in here before and I don't really go looking for news about second life outside of the forums. I just kind of keep everything about second life to the forums and in world and some youtube, as well and shopping things like Seraphim and MP.. But that's about as outside as I get after SLU shut down years ago.

2019 sounds about around the time the genus head was coming out with it's beta, which a lot of my SL at that time was hanging in that group and trying to create some sort of animation hud and hunting down animations that would work with the head, which took forever in a day, as well as helping others with troubleshooting their heads.. So that could be why as well..

2018 I think I was still on a break from SL for what might have been a year maybe longer.. I can't remember really.

I did recently get some information in world which I think was a blog article or something with images and what sounded like someone doing undercover work.. But after reading about half way, it felt very constructed.. Like someone making a thriller or detective story, so I stopped reading about half way.. it just felt too convenient and too well crafted, like they happened to be in the right place at the right time when all of a sudden something  happened or someone popped in.. So I just put it down and went on with my second life because it felt more like propaganda half way through.. To me anyways.. I just figured, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a good chance it might be a duck.. I tried my best to open my eyes while reading it and not let any bias come into it, because it was important in my eyes to do that.

I'm not trying to defend LL or anything like that and I'm not a child avatar hater at all, not of the ones that follow the rules anyways.  I've stood up for them real hard back when the maternity ratings were changed.. I think Freedom of expression is really important in this world and the real world especially.

All I have been saying is in this thread is about what is happening in the moment with the changes, what LL should do or could have done.

If I remember right, didn't they say something about doing things in the future back when the CEO's blog post came out on the topic..

Maybe this is just the first step.. 

All I know is this is where we are at now and nothing more.. hehehe

 

 

 

 

There were multiple child avatar hate groups, that target child avatars regardless of what they are doing, no matter what the age is behind the avatar.

I've heard and seen people say there would be people blackmailing child avatars into doing things or face being reported on a general or Moderate sim.

I've, also, heard this happen to petites that were just adult women, people would blackmail them into doing stuff or face being reported by men and women, because the height issue in the pass. That was why they fixed it and said height does not matter, but people made people believe that it did matter and that sometimes happen still.

Like this happened to an owner of a spa sim, where she was skinny, 5'2" her boyfriend was 7'8" people just mass reported her and she was instantly banned, because they were cuddled up.

Now it's in clear text. "Height doesn't make you a child alone." you cannot mass report someone for being short.

Edited May 3 by Starberry Passion

[Love Zhaoying]

3 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

All that was a long time ago; it's very possible there are more reliable and/or less intrusive verification methods now in common use.

Assuming that some US states and other jurisdictions "do" or "will" require "better" age verification per their local laws, perhaps there is some possibility there will be a version of that same verification for everyone (or special cases).  

I know that came up in other threads recently.

But I digress because, the thread really isn't apparently about any TOS changes for "who's an ACTUAL child", but seems to be more focused on "child avatars".

Edited May 3 by Love Zhaoying
Added "better"

[Vivienne Schell]

26 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Unless I'm missing something, this part seems totally impractical.

I guess they wanna adress the people who create dedicated skins for the pedo audience in very first place. Selling or promoting such a skin without modesty patches will be a bad idea from now on. Also, even BOM layer modesty makes the little, but agressive and loud minority of age players cry, judged by the outburst of agressive ignorance here on the forums. Funny that they all focus on these patches and the adult sim ban instead of cleaning up their profiles which usually include tons of links (groups, picks) to adult content sites.

Edited May 3 by Vivienne Schell
garmmar error

[Rowan Amore]

25 minutes ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

Couldn't the whole BoM thing on top of your base avatar's skin layer problem be solved by either LL themselves making approved kid avatars (though after Senra's overall look, maybe not) or simply have any shop selling child/pre-teen avatars simply turn off BoM and work with any one of a handful of popular skin places to make them in the right skin tones?

For example, you go to shop for your 10 year old avatar body at "10 year Olds R Us" and but one boy one. Voila, inside the HUD for the body are 10 skin settings from Velour to pick from (much like the new LaraX comes with), and no BoM option, so that when buy your head you simply need a skin for that head that matches the Velour tones?

I kind of mentioned this earlier.  Technically, a system skin can't be removed but can be replaced.  Velour could make a killing offering skins for child/teen avatars which include the modesty.  No BoM layers.  

Unless LL requires a specific body with a specific skin, skin creators will have a new group of customers interested in modesty skins that will match their existing faces.

[Katherine Heartsong]

1 hour ago, Daniel Regenbogen said:

Now as landlord I can't simply visit a homestead of my customers because it is set adult - not even to quickly fix the rental box or help with some terraforming issues. As a creator I can't visit for example an animation store because the region it is on is set to adult, because they (amongst hundreds of others) they sell a couple of adult animations, too. I now have to first switch to a different avatar ...

It takes what? 5–10 seconds to change to an appropriate avatar for those tasks?

Open panel, right click on a preset adult avatar you have (or a housecat in my case), choose "replace avatar" and voila. Good to go. Sorry, but you make it sound like something dreadfully onerous.

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

Open panel, right click on a preset adult avatar you have (or a housecat in my case), choose "replace avatar" and voila. Good to go. Sorry, but you make it sound like something dreadfully onerous.

YOU try clicking with pawpads and toebeans! >^^<

Edited May 3 by Love Zhaoying

[Daniel Regenbogen]

27 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

If you're behaving as an adult sometimes, like performing as a landlord, why don't you be an adult avatar at those times. Changing between avatars is extremely fast. It's you, as a child, who wants to be in adult places, so it's you, as a child, who should spend a few seconds changing. The world shouldn't have to change just for you.

I approve of the new regulations concerning child avatars. It's very late, but it's a good move.

The question is: why should I have to do that? To visit a furniture store that in one corner has sex beds? An animation store that in one corner has sex animations? In other corners they have child furniture/animations that I would like to try out with my normal avatar and size (for which I would be shopping)? There are many adult rated places that only have some areas that really have adult content - why not just keep child avatars away from exactly those areas? Years ago many region owners switched to adult just to be on the safe side out of fear of being reported for a nothingburger. Especially with governance following the principle of "shoot first - never ask questions later" as soon as child avatars are involved.

And wasn't it once "Your world - your imagination"? SL being the place where for example I can be a 14yo landlord which I couldn't be in RL. Creating and selling stuff which I couldn't do in RL.

[Katherine Heartsong]

55 minutes ago, NicholasTheHufflepuffWizard said:

When it comes to creators of bodies and skins on Second Life needing to make a modesty layer, I feel like they should be given a bit more time to do so instead of June 30th. Which I think is pretty much is half a month to get it out, if I am correct.

[ignore me]

I saw you already noted the time issue.

Edited May 3 by Katherine Heartsong

[Katherine Heartsong]

39 minutes ago, Starberry Passion said:

That's not going to happen, modesty in S.L. The adult side of S.L was made for adulting. If people wanted modesty, the would stick to general clubs, not Mature nor Adult. If you're in an adult club in an adult sim, people are going to adult all the time. 

Was meant as teasing/joke.

[NicholasTheHufflepuffWizard]

Just now, Katherine Heartsong said:

June 30 is more than seven weeks from today, closer to two months, not half a month. Or was that just a typing error?

It was a miscalculation on my part, an error of my own. While it is ample time to comply with the modesty regulation, some may not realistically be able to catch up. Which is why I recommended for more time. 

[Qie Niangao]

2 minutes ago, Vivienne Schell said:

I guess they wanna adress the people who create dedicated skins for the pedo audience in very first place. Selling or promoting such a skin without modesty patches will be a bad idea from now on. Also, even BOM layer modesty makes the little, but agressive and loud minority of age players cry, judged by the outburst of agressive ignorance here on the forums. Funny that they all focus on these patches and the adult sim ban instead cleaning up their profiles which usually include tons of links (groups, picks) to adult content sites.

Thanks, yeah, I have no idea about how that culture operates in practice. I've been trying to imagine plausibly enforceable policy specifics, but the avatar mechanics make it all seem hopeless. I mean, whatever's on the skin and however it's masked through BOM-baked textures, there's always the ability to repaint the naughty bits on an applier layer above the BOM layer. Or the other way around if the BOM layer had the suggested alpha masks: just apply the system BOM textures to a higher layer of the avatar and applier-paint the immodest stuff on a layer underneath so it can show through the alpha.

Ultimately, it really must be the whole avatar appearance that matters… although child avatars won't be able to shop for immodest skins, so that's a thing I guess.

[Katherine Heartsong]

1 minute ago, NicholasTheHufflepuffWizard said:

It was a miscalculation on my part, an error of my own. While it is ample time to comply with the modesty regulation, some may not realistically be able to catch up. Which is why I recommended for more time. 

Apologies, I retracted my earlier post having seen that you had already dealt with the time thing. Thread is just moving so fast

[Daniel Regenbogen]

27 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

To punish the guilty alone, one has to FIND them and the EVIDENCE first.

 

Yes they did, they went to adult rated areas like they had some innate right to be there. The ToS was faulty, now that fault is fixed.

 

Really? Where in RL are 14 yr olds allowed to walk into Adults only shops, bars, clubs, movies, and demand in a loud but comically fake childish accent that all the Adults should stop being adult in adult places?

Well, then find the evidence first. That would actually follow the most basic rule of judgement: not guilty until proven.

There are many adult rated areas that have none or next to none adult stuff on site. A corner for sexbeds in a furniture store. Animations in an animation store. Not to forget the places which were set to adult "just to be on the safe side" by their owners.

And I'm not talking about "real" adult shops, bars or clubs. Remember the good old days of video rental shops? They often had an adult area where kids were not allowed - and many others areas where kids were free to roam. Or nude (family) beaches - I grew up on them. Nothing sexual ever happened there - the beach goers themselves took care of that.

I'm all for judging actual actions - but not for judging simple appearance.

[NicholasTheHufflepuffWizard]

Just now, Katherine Heartsong said:

Apologies, I retracted my earlier post having seen that you had already dealt with the time thing. Thread is just moving so fast

That's alright, I appreciate your response. I originally thought that it was half of a month due to when the TOS Policy for Second Life was updated, since June is next month. But I do see your logic, it makes sense. 

[Ceka Cianci]

6 minutes ago, Starberry Passion said:

There were multiple child avatar hate groups, that target child avatars regardless of what they are doing, no matter what the age is behind the avatar.

I've heard and seen people say there would be people blackmailing child avatars into doing things or face being reported on a general or Moderate sim.

I've, also, heard this happen to petites that were just adult women, people would blackmail them into doing stuff or face being reported by men and women, because the height issue in the pass. That was why they fixed it and said height does not matter, but people made people believe that it did matter and that sometimes happen still.

Like this happened to an owner of a spa sim, where she was skinny, 5'2" her boyfriend was 7'8" people just mass reported her and she was instantly banned, because they were cuddled up.

Now it's in clear text. "Height doesn't make you a child alone." you cannot mass report someone for being short.

Back when they made the UnderAge play rule (<== we'll see if that gets word filtered or not hehehe) They put size in there rather than height.. It's just that a lot of people didn't read it and took it upon themselves to use height as one of the main factors, hence the height detectors showing up everywhere even before the maturity ratings came out.

The mobs going after child avatars back when the maturity ratings was going on, was crazy bad.. A lot of creators in the Xstreet forums.. Well known ones at the time too, were even in on the fear of child avatars getting them in trouble. These forums it was really chaotic as well.. it was like inworld and forums were linked more than ever.. A terrible time for the community really in world and all the forums  for it, not counting the blogs..

But ya, I'm pretty aware of how they have had it rough for a long time.. I was in a lot of the fights backing up the good rule following child avatars back then, because I'm not a fan at all of fear mongering and those spreading it getting more and more riled up.. I really hate when people do that.  It gets me riled.. hehehe

 

[Starberry Passion]

9 minutes ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

Was meant as teasing/joke.

Oh okay, sorry then.

[Vanity Fair]

17 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I don't get the impression that "no genitals" is enough for any child/baby -- modesty layers must be there.

Also, Zooby babies are animesh attachments, and we're talking about avatars in this thread, not attachments.

Although if Linden Lab decides to extend the ban to animesh babies (and even static-object babies), that is gonna open up a whole new can of worms....

FUN FACT: Many years ago, one store on the grid mistakenly set a static prim-object baby to free, so I promptly picked up eight, and attached them to my arms, legs, and other parts of my body to create an impromptu Octomom outfit for Vanity Fair. Aaah, the good old days... 😜 I think I saved that outfit somewhere, if I can find a picture I will share it.

UPDATE: Okay, found the outfit! Four girls AND four boys! Each of these babies contains 34 prims!!!

 

Edited May 3 by Vanity Fair

[Persephone Emerald]

8 hours ago, Drayke Newall said:

But therein lies the problem. What is the point of enforcing a ruling that a modesty layer cannot be removed from the skin when you can simply remove it from the skin by wearing another BoM skin or Layer on top that also allows you to add any 'adult' looking parts back on.

I have no concerns that the ruling is for 'identifying' avatars as child or not, but enforcing a rule that can be broken in 1 second by applying something over a skin using BoM is just pointless.

It's pointless to create a rule that is so easy to break and cannot be enforced. The resources of Governace are severely limited and rely almost exclusively on users to Abuse Report infractions by other residents and creators. 

In the case of what kinds of skins and BOM layers other avatars are wearing, most of us would not care, so most of the ARs are likely to come from those who just want to stir up trouble. These people will flood Governace with reports on users who really aren't doing anything wrong. Governance is then going to have to either hire more people to deal with frivolous reports or continue to ignore most reports, even those which really should be investigated.

What signals a more serious problem to Governace, a report and picture of a child-like avatar engaged in a sex act or a report and picture of a naked child-like avatar just standing somewhere, especially when in the 2nd case their mesh clothing might have just been derendered? And if the avatar is wearing a BOM bathing suit over a naked skin, how is this a problem at all?