Starberry Passion Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 8 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said: Why is everyone saying this? It's like people want it locked. It will just continue in a newly created thread with a different title. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starberry Passion Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 4 minutes ago, Cristiano Midnight said: No disrespect to whoever that is, but that is some uncanny valley level ***** right there. 😱 IRK! lol! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissSweetViolet Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 2 minutes ago, brodiac90 said: I personally want clarity on the cannot be removed part of the modesty layer. Does it mean a skin that when applied can't be nude, or does it mean the avatar can never have any skin without the modesty layer, because if that's the case then I don't know how any creator is going to do that. The only way would be a completely new child avatar where skins cannot be applied (is that even possible?) I think LL may just have banned all child avis unless I'm wrong. Agreed, this needs clarity. The way it's worded I assume never be able to take it off, means part of the body mesh, since you could swap a skin. My thought on how to this without braking skins would be to have an underwear layer over the top [like a tattoo or clothing layer on say Maitreya. This layer wouldn't react to BoM or appliers and might have it's own hud to change the pattern. but since it would be part of the mesh, would meet the requirement. and skins would render under it so applier/BoM skins would still work. Of course the downside to this is the body would need to be no mod, since otherwise you could make it transparent, and when wearing BoM tights or bottoms, your underwear would be outside them. But at least you could still use skins. I legit have no idea how else to make it work that doesn't break a ton more stuff. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 33 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said: All skins they're wearing right now will need to be trashed. A point I've tried to articulate before is, if you wear "modesty underwear" OVER those skins, it should be just fine. Bad parts of the body not showing = "not reportable", even if you're not wearing an "official" modesty layer. I think the options just were not very well explained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 7 hours ago, Starberry Passion said: Or they use an adult head and think it looks like a child, but it doesn't look like it but it's on a child avatar body, For example. The face look like some 20 year old woman's face but it's on a child's body. We all have our own opinions. I think she looks about 12-14 in the face. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starberry Passion Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said: We all have our own opinions. I think she looks about 12-14 in the face. I can respect that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theresa Ravenheart Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 10 minutes ago, brodiac90 said: I personally want clarity on the cannot be removed part of the modesty layer. Does it mean a skin that when applied can't be nude, or does it mean the avatar can never have any skin without the modesty layer, because if that's the case then I don't know how any creator is going to do that. The only way would be a completely new child avatar where skins cannot be applied (is that even possible?) I think LL may just have banned all child avis unless I'm wrong. It sounds to me, if your mesh body is not updated to comply with the new rules, you cannot wear it at all. It seems to me that all kid/teen mesh bodies will have to be updated and if they are not updated by the creator, they can no longer be used at all. This might be solved if the skin layer has the added modesty panels, but I'm not sure because it would be easy to override that with a tattoo or clothing Bom layer with adult details. Q: I already have a child avatar that does not have a built in modesty layer. Can I still use that since I purchased it already? A: No. Going forward, child avatars will be prohibited from being fully nude. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingrid Ingersoll Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Am I imagining this or did one of the kid body makers already leave sl in March.over concerns of how they were being used in sl? 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, Theresa Ravenheart said: Q: I already have a child avatar that does not have a built in modesty layer. Can I still use that since I purchased it already? A: No. Going forward, child avatars will be prohibited from being fully nude. This is interesting because it is "at odds" with the TOS statement someone copied earlier that said there must be a modesty layer for the body OR skin. This is an example where the FAQ's don't really line up well with the TOS statements, and are adding to the confusion and concerns. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brodiac90 Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Theresa Ravenheart said: It sounds to me, if your mesh body is not updated to comply with the new rules, you cannot wear it at all. It seems to me that all kid/teen mesh bodies will have to be updated and if they are not updated by the creator, they can no longer be used at all. This might be solved if the skin layer has the added modesty panels, but I'm not sure because it would be easy to override that with a tattoo or clothing Bom layer with adult details. Q: I already have a child avatar that does not have a built in modesty layer. Can I still use that since I purchased it already? A: No. Going forward, child avatars will be prohibited from being fully nude. And my question is, can creators even achieve what is required in the TOS? I want them to be able to as I very much like not being banned. Edited May 3 by brodiac90 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Starberry Passion said: No, I'm pretty sure that this clarifies that those who do have a petite build, are slim and are grown women don't have to live in fear for being women who are just skinny. Stop trying to say that slim, petite or short is childlike, it's not. Ok then, all that secttion says is short, slim and petite will not be the sole factors if a abuse report is filed. Short, slim, petite women may still be restricted from entering regions by region owners. Better? Edited May 3 by Rowan Amore 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, Ingrid Ingersoll said: Am I imagining this or did one of the kid body makers already leave sl in March.over concerns of how they were being used in sl? Could be both, so yes. I can't remember which brand left, "Toonces", or "Twiddles", or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissSweetViolet Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, Ingrid Ingersoll said: Am I imagining this or did one of the kid body makers already leave sl in March.over concerns of how they were being used in sl? Zooby stopped making child avatars over the article, but no one had given reports of misuse to my knowledge, but the creator was afraid it would come to that so stopped selling them. They still make the animesh ones though. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, Rowan Amore said: Ok then, all that secttion says is short, slim and petite will not be the sole factors if a abuse report is filed. Short, slim, petit women may still be restricted from entering regions by region owners. Better? I do see people in this thread conflating the LL rules with the fact individual region owners can "Ban" for whatever reason. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathlen Onyx Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 I have a question that I don't think has been covered here. Are there any ramifications for region owners if they allow Child Avi's on their land. Say there is a club that is A rated and only has child avi's that are all out of compliance. Will the club/region owner also be banned for allowing this or is this simply on an avatar case by case basis? In other words, should region owners be concerned here at all about being perma banned? 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissSweetViolet Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said: This is interesting because it is "at odds" with the TOS statement someone copied earlier that said there must be a modesty layer for the body OR skin. This is an example where the FAQ's don't really line up well with the TOS statements, and are adding to the confusion and concerns. Agreed, this is thing thing that makes me think they mean built in to the body mesh. If they don't mean that, then they really really need to clarify. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theresa Ravenheart Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Something that might be good for LL to look at and use to define the modesty coverage rules for child and teen avatars, it should be clearly defined liked IMVU does so that it cannot be questioned at all. https://create.imvu.com/articles/classic/understanding-minimum-coverage-guidelines/#:~:text=To accurately test the coverage,not sheer or transparent). 6 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingrid Ingersoll Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 1 minute ago, MissSweetViolet said: Zooby stopped making child avatars over the article, but no one had given reports of misuse to my knowledge, but the creator was afraid it would come to that so stopped selling them. They still make the animesh ones though. Maybe kid stuff creators will feel better about making content given the new restrictions. 5 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, MissSweetViolet said: Agreed, this is thing thing that makes me think they mean built in to the body mesh. If they don't mean that, then they really really need to clarify. I think, based on my own variety of "common sense" (which certain people LOVE to deride me over), if the FAQ's disagree with the TOS, then the TOS "wins". In that case, we need to ask and get LL to "clarify or fix" the FAQ's. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, Ingrid Ingersoll said: Maybe kid stuff creators will feel better about making content given the new restrictions. I like your choice of words! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathlen Onyx Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 2 minutes ago, MissSweetViolet said: Agreed, this is thing thing that makes me think they mean built in to the body mesh. If they don't mean that, then they really really need to clarify. A BOM layer can be removed. It's if built into the body it can't be removed. A different body must be used. I would assume, based on common sense, the don't mean BOM skin layer. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissSweetViolet Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 1 minute ago, Theresa Ravenheart said: Something that might be good for LL to look at and use to define the modesty coverage rules for child and teen avatars, it should be clearly defined liked IMVU does so that it cannot be questioned at all. https://create.imvu.com/articles/classic/understanding-minimum-coverage-guidelines/#:~:text=To accurately test the coverage,not sheer or transparent). For teens that works, but gets trickier for some bodies, because with TD Baby, Kid, and Tweeneedoo, [and probably others, but I've only ever used Kid], their is no male/female body, any gender uses the same body, so you'd have included two versions if it went this route. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madi Melodious Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 15 minutes ago, Starberry Passion said: So, basically all I have to do is declare that i'm no longer a child avatar and I can keep my shape and look? Very good. "I'm no longer a child avatar." there problem solved. 3 1 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brodiac90 Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 13 minutes ago, MissSweetViolet said: Agreed, this needs clarity. The way it's worded I assume never be able to take it off, means part of the body mesh, since you could swap a skin. My thought on how to this without braking skins would be to have an underwear layer over the top [like a tattoo or clothing layer on say Maitreya. This layer wouldn't react to BoM or appliers and might have it's own hud to change the pattern. but since it would be part of the mesh, would meet the requirement. and skins would render under it so applier/BoM skins would still work. Of course the downside to this is the body would need to be no mod, since otherwise you could make it transparent, and when wearing BoM tights or bottoms, your underwear would be outside them. But at least you could still use skins. I legit have no idea how else to make it work that doesn't break a ton more stuff. I think this might be the only way to do it. Like, you hav your body, and then you have mesh underwear over your body which then is locked in place. So when you put on your avatar the underwear is always there. If that's the case then every fit mesh clothing is broken. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayashe Ninetails Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 12 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said: A point I've tried to articulate before is, if you wear "modesty underwear" OVER those skins, it should be just fine. Not according to the TOS. It needs to be baked into the skin or body itself. How they'll police that is a whole other question, but: "Child avatar content creators are required to add a modesty layer which is baked into child avatar skins or bodies, is not transparent, does not match the skin tone, and may not be removed." 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts