So what changed in the Terms of Service?

[Starberry Passion]

7 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

I propose we start referring to body shapes as fruit - pear, apple, grapefruit, banana, kumquat, ....

That is already a thing, for example, another name for Triangle is Pear, another name for Rectangle body shape is Banana

[Ingrid Ingersoll]

32 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

I think I’m gonna stop doing the naughty with giants 

Maybe that's a good idea. 

[Sid Nagy]

Attention, attention to all participants.
The 20st round of recycling the same arguments over and over again starts in 5... 4... 3... 2.. 1!!
Enjoy the new round.
One can start copy and pasting from page 4 on warts.

 

Edited May 4 by Sid Nagy

[Starberry Passion]

3 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

Bone structure is part of said facial features.

right and there are many women who look like this woman due to facial features and bone structure.

This is very common in second life, Places like Heaux, Little Fox, Mudskins are very much Asian inspired.

[Miho Eton]

11 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

I propose we start referring to body shapes as fruit - pear, apple, grapefruit, banana, kumquat, ....

I don't think woman would just have does body types there is also hourglass. 

[BriannaLovey]

9 minutes ago, Vivienne Schell said:

The rule is perfectly clear. Modesty patches on child avi must be baked on skin and must  be mot removable. And done.

She is saying that someone could make a tattoo layer that negates the modesty part. This is trivially easy for people experienced with skin creation.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 hour ago, Innula Zenovka said:

For what it's worth, I've always thought that if you feel you have to stress in your profile that your avatar is supposed to be 18 or more, that's probably a sign that enough people think it doesn't look like an 18 year old that it would be a good idea to tweak your appearance a bit.

Possibly true, but I suspect the more common reason is that they are RPing in contexts where one would not expect to find someone who is 18+. For instance, to use my go-to example, a sexy high school RP scenario. That Grade 11 student being "disciplined" by teach after class would, in an RL context, be most unlikely to be 18 or older, so the context suggests a*eplay. But if the profile says 18+, then the person probably believes that they have established "plausible deniability": even though the RP would seem to indicate a breaking of the rules, they can point to that statement and claim to be playing . . . an 18 year old Grade 11 student.

Whether Governance would buy that is, of course, a whole other story. But my sense, given the popularity of this kind of RP, is that they have in the past.

[Starberry Passion]

1 minute ago, Wincil said:

I don't think woman would just have does body types there is also hourglass. 

Hourglass was included though..

[Monika Skydancer]

Just now, BriannaLovey said:

She is saying that someone could make a tattoo layer that negates the modesty part.

And I'm gonna guess that someone would be opening themselves up to a ban. I mean seriously, child avis ain't allowed to be nude. That's pretty clear. You try to get round the modesty patches, you're trying to be nude. It's obvs a violation.

[Starberry Passion]

1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Possibly true, but I suspect the more common reason is that they are RPing in contexts where one would not expect to find someone who is 18+. For instance, to use my go-to example, a sexy high school RP scenario. That Grade 11 student being "disciplined" by teach after class would, in an RL context, be most unlikely to be 18 or older, so the context suggests a*eplay. But if the profile says 18+, then the person probably believes that they have established "plausible deniability": even though the RP would seem to indicate a breaking of the rules, they can point to that statement and claim to be playing . . . an 18 year old Grade 11 student.

Whether Governance would buy that is, of course, a whole other story. But my sense, given the popularity of this kind of RP, is that they have in the past.

It is, also, highly possible that the person feels their person is 18, wants it to be 18+ and is saying it is 18+ because they are being harassed for looking a certain way that someone else does not agree with.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Starberry Passion said:

It is, also, highly possible that the person feels their person is 18, wants it to be 18+ and is saying it is 18+ because they are being harassed for looking a certain way that someone else does not agree with.

Also possible, of course.

[Miho Eton]

4 minutes ago, Starberry Passion said:

Hourglass was included though..

Well most people come in different shapes and sizes and that include woman there's plenty of examples of that in the real world.   

Edited May 4 by Wincil

[Starberry Passion]

1 minute ago, Wincil said:

Well most people come in different shapes and sizes and that include woman.  

that is why I displayed several shapes and sizes...

[Aya Sweetheart]

1 minute ago, Monika Skydancer said:

And I'm gonna guess that someone would be opening themselves up to a ban. I mean seriously, child avis ain't allowed to be nude. That's pretty clear. You try to get round the modesty patches, you're trying to be nude. It's obvs a violation.

That's why I think they should change the wording... not the spirit of the rule.  I am not debating the rule, just how its worded poorly and making people make assumptions.  Some people here are taking those assumptions easily and not understanding how things might be misread or misunderstood.

They need to show an example... then need to say that this modesty rule is required at all times to be followed, and they can do that without causing the huge uproar they are now by making new easily circumvented requirements.  It only hurts legit users and creators and the bad actors just bypass it all.

[Miho Eton]

Ngl unrealistic body sizes is a huge turn off for me  

[Blush Bravin]

6 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Possibly true, but I suspect the more common reason is that they are RPing in contexts where one would not expect to find someone who is 18+. For instance, to use my go-to example, a sexy high school RP scenario. That Grade 11 student being "disciplined" by teach after class would, in an RL context, be most unlikely to be 18 or older, so the context suggests a*eplay. But if the profile says 18+, then the person probably believes that they have established "plausible deniability": even though the RP would seem to indicate a breaking of the rules, they can point to that statement and claim to be playing . . . an 18 year old Grade 11 student.

Whether Governance would buy that is, of course, a whole other story. But my sense, given the popularity of this kind of RP, is that they have in the past.

RL that teacher is going to jail. The severity of the charge might depend on if that student has failed grades several times, but regardless that teacher is toast.

[MinkBlueleaf Fyrewik]

Here's a comprehensive list of some female bodytypes: vase, skittle, hourglass, goblet, column, pear, cornet, lollipop, bell, cello, brick and the apple.

Enjoy, courtesty of: https://www.bodyshapecalculator.co.uk/trinny-and-susannahs-12-body-shapes

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Blush Bravin said:

RL that teacher is going to jail. The severity of the charge might depend on if that student has failed grades several times, but regardless that teacher is toast.

That I am sure is part of the "thrill."

[Blush Bravin]

1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

That I am sure is part of the "thrill."

As a retired teacher, it makes me want to throw up!

[Rowan Amore]

2 minutes ago, Wincil said:

Ngl unrealistic body sizes is a huge turn off for me  

Unrealistic faces are a turn off for me.  Ngl

[Zalificent Corvinus]

3 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

The only way I've been able to make any sense of this

You are having problems understanding it because you have failed to grasp two essential points.

Point 1, the ToS was written by somebody legal who knows sod all about how avatars actually work, and used the word skin when they basically meant "surface of a mesh body".

Point2. You seem to think that they want system skin makers to PAINT censor bars on the textures used for bom skins.

That's not it at all.

A "censored bom skin" will not be ToS compliant, because it can be SWAPPED for a diffferent bom sskin thatss not censored when the pint-sized anti-adult - wearer thinks Governance are not looking over their shoulder.

ToS says "cannot be removed".

 

This is all bout NO MOD mesh bodies, with built in non-flesh coloured patches of triangles over where the rude bits would be if they hadn't been surgically removed in Blender.

 

Any bom skin can still be worn, because the rude bits of the skin are uv mapped to polygons that are no longer there, and the "modesty panels" are NOT Bom at all or mod at all.

 

Think no mod sticking plasters welded to your no mod mesh body.

3 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

if all potentially child-representing avatars are replaced by a new generation with a non-BOM lowest texture layer.

That's ass-backwards, the non bom material faces are highest, over the top of where the bom material would have been if it hadn't been cut away.

 

3 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

Who will know including Governance that I'm wearing a verboten skin under an alpha mask rather than the modesty-patched version of that skin under the same alpha mask?

First of all wearing a "modesty patched skin under a bom alpha won't be acceptable.

Second, how would Governance know? They are Linden with Admin powers including looking in your inventory at the "current outfit" folder, and seeing "Bento Walking-ToS Violation Avatar ver 1.0, ToS-Violation Inc censored bom skin ver 1.0, ToS-Violati0n Inc alpha layer ver 1.0". That's how.

 

There is also no need to derender the perps mesh clothing. a "What is she wearing" Hud will show "bento Walking Tos-Violation avatar ver 1.0 with no censor bandaids".

That is literally all that will be  needed.

Use the WISW Hud, file an AR with the local chat window listing what the perp is wearing, boom, Governance moves in and kicks perp ass.

 

 

r

[BriannaLovey]

8 minutes ago, Monika Skydancer said:

And I'm gonna guess that someone would be opening themselves up to a ban. I mean seriously, child avis ain't allowed to be nude. That's pretty clear. You try to get round the modesty patches, you're trying to be nude. It's obvs a violation.

Of course. But actually enforcing this would be difficult, as it would require automated scanning of all textures uploaded to SL, and the cost that this would incur. Those who limit their use of such textures to non-public areas would be able to evade enforcement easily.

[Leslie Trihey]

3 minutes ago, Monika Skydancer said:

And I'm gonna guess that someone would be opening themselves up to a ban. I mean seriously, child avis ain't allowed to be nude. That's pretty clear. You try to get round the modesty patches, you're trying to be nude. It's obvs a violation.

To me one particular problem stands out from all this:

There is literally no difference between abuse reporting someone not wearing/overriding a modesty layer, and abuse reporting someone not wearing a BOM cover layer. The end result is the same.

The only difference is that the modesty layer will require people to get rid of their old stuff that can't be compliant due to circumstances like the creator not being around anymore. Forcing people to not use/trash stuff they have had for years and payed money for due to circumstances outside of their control does not sit well.

The "Modesty Layer" rule quite frankly sounds like lip service, that's going to end up costing quite a few people a lot of investment.

[Qie Niangao]

1 minute ago, Aya Sweetheart said:

That's why I think they should change the wording... not the spirit of the rule. 

They need to change the wording anyway, unless they really mean (as it says) that child avatar content creators need to make these magic modesty patches, but nobody is required to use them. The avatars themselves are just forbidden to be fully nude. (Technically, then, the policy states the restriction I'd completely support for the avatars, but with an extra hobby for skin creators.)

[Monika Skydancer]

1 minute ago, Leslie Trihey said:

Forcing people to not use/trash stuff they have had for years and payed money for due to circumstances outside of their control does not sit well.

The "Modesty Layer" rule quite frankly sounds like lip service, that's going to end up costing quite a few people a lot of investment.

It's SL. The tech develops, we buy new stuff & old stuff becomes obsolete. I'd guess 90% of the stuff in my inv never gets worn anymore & a big chunk of that can't be worn anymore. This world didn't come with any guarantee your stuff was gonna last forever.