Arielle Popstar Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 13 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. Considering residents are for the most part over 18 in real life, the assumption would or should start from old enough and then look for clues where it is determined that one was playing as someone younger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 23 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said: 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. How do you think the new policies will affect creators and stores? Haven't heard much or anything from that group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sammy Huntsman Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 Just now, Arielle Popstar said: How do you think the new policies will affect creators and stores? Haven't heard much or anything from that group. actually the few I have on FB are actually praising and congratulating LL for making these changes. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wincil Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 (edited) Tbh I could care less if people get turned of by unrealistic facial features there's no right way of saying this.(I flamed someone by mistake not my intention I got pushed off the edge.) Edited May 4 by Wincil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 4 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said: actually the few I have on FB are actually praising and congratulating LL for making these changes. What were they creating/selling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivienne Schell Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 14 minutes ago, Aya Sweetheart said: 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. I miss the "huge uproar" in SL. There isn´t any, neither on the forums nor inworld. 99 percent of users welcome the changes. The rest mutters on wordings or wahtever for whatever reason. Here at this forum it´s like 10 people repeating their opinion all over again. Face it, outside the a++player circuits and probably the circles of those who benefit by a++play no one really cares. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blush Bravin Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 7 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said: Considering residents are for the most part over 18 in real life, the assumption would or should start from old enough and then look for clues where it is determined that one was playing as someone younger. IMO anyone engaged in sex with a high school student is participating in a*eplay regardless of what age someone's profile claims. We all know the age of high school students. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 Just now, Blush Bravin said: IMO anyone engaged in sex with a high school student is participating in a*eplay regardless of what age someone's profile claims. We all know the age of high school students. Could be changed to a college one easy enough and maybe even better, 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nika Talaj Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 4 minutes ago, Monika Skydancer said: This world didn't come with any guarantee your stuff was gonna last forever. QFT ------------------------ /me notes that this thread is being actively moderated RIGHT NOW. Politeness is not just a virtue, at the moment it's a necessity. ------------------------ There's a LOT of repetition in this thread. I haven't seen a new issue in quite a few pages; of course, as new people notice the thread, they will post. But I think we've given the Lindens quite a bit to mull over already. I think I can hear a thumping noise, which I believe is the head of whoever is in charge of governance banging on their desk. Actually, I wonder who IS in charge of governance now ... hard to believe it's still Patch. If we make it hard enough for LL to implement a policy response, one thing that COULD happen is transferring governance to report to legal. At which point anything having to do with governance could become MUCH more difficult. Hopefully that's just paranoia. (is it?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 7 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said: 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.) Technically, you are absolutely correct -- but I suspect that the way it has been worded inadvertently reveals LL's real motivation here, which is to be able to demonstrate that they've "done something" by insisting that skins for underage avatars are, by default, not nude. Anyone who finds a work-around (as for instance a tattoo layer that "re-fleshifies" the groin) has violated that -- but it's not LL's fault: they put the "system" in place, and someone has merely found a way around it. As many have already noted, actually detecting whether or not a child avatar is wearing a skin with baked-in undies is likely to be very difficult, as that area of the body might well be alphaed out, or covered up with BOM. I get why this particular part of the new rules is causing so much angst, but honestly I think it's actually, in some ways, the least important of them. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leslie Trihey Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 1 minute ago, Monika Skydancer said: 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. Your comparing items becoming obsolete due to the march of time over years to forced compliance with a penalty of banning for non-compliance on short notice, in some cases with the need to replace the entire avatar and it's wardrobe. You also still have the ability to access and use the stuff in your inventory, besides the rare broken item, they won't. Not everyone will be able to afford to replace their avatars. SL is becoming a luxury that is getting increasingly hard to justify in today's economy. Nor will everybody want to, why would someone spend a bunch more money on a company that effectively just robbed them of years of time and investment? I wouldn't. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 14 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said: Considering residents are for the most part over 18 in real life, the assumption would or should start from old enough and then look for clues where it is determined that one was playing as someone younger. This is conflating two very different things: RL age, and represented age. Yeah, I can assume that that cute My Little Pony avatar is really a human because RL My Little Ponies don't have opposable thumbs and can't type or use a mouse, but that's totally irrelevant to the context of SL. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 7 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said: IMO anyone engaged in sex with a high school student is participating in a*eplay regardless of what age someone's profile claims. We all know the age of high school students. In practice, I'd agree. I think the same is probably true of vast majority of "incest" RP. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 5 minutes ago, Nika Talaj said: Actually, I wonder who IS in charge of governance now ... hard to believe it's still Patch. If we make it hard enough for LL to implement a policy response, one thing that COULD happen is transferring governance to report to legal. At which point anything having to do with governance could become MUCH more difficult. Hopefully that's just paranoia. (is it?) Wasn't there a post from a Tommy Linden earlier identifying as the head of Governance? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 How the hell did I get THIRTY notifications in the time it took to write two short posts?????? 😮 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wincil Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 I think 5 minutes ago, Leslie Trihey said: Your comparing items becoming obsolete due to the march of time over years to forced compliance with a penalty of banning for non-compliance on short notice, in some cases with the need to replace the entire avatar and it's wardrobe. You also still have the ability to access and use the stuff in your inventory, besides the rare broken item, they won't. Not everyone will be able to afford to replace their avatars. SL is becoming a luxury that is getting increasingly hard to justify in today's economy. Nor will everybody want to, why would someone spend a bunch more money on a company that effectively just robbed them of years of time and investment? I wouldn't. Ngl I would feel the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said: Wasn't there a post from a Tommy Linden earlier identifying as the head of Governance? I think it's been Tommy for quite some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arwyn Quandry Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 1 hour ago, Theresa Ravenheart said: Additionally, it would be beneficial for Linden Lab to adopt clear guidelines, akin to those of IMVU, regarding modesty coverage for child and teen avatars. These rules should be unambiguous and easily applicable to prevent any ambiguities: https://create.imvu.com/articles/classic/understanding-minimum-coverage-guidelines/#:~:text=To accurately test the coverage,not sheer or transparent Completely agree with this. Searching MP, I've seen plenty of absolutely disturbing string bikinis and thongs made for child avatars. Do they cover the nipples/crotch? Sure, but barely, and they're incredibly inappropriate. Having minimum coverage standards would provide actual guides instead of leaving it up to the individual to determine what's ok (and risk themselves/their customers getting banned if LL disagrees). 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: I think it's been Tommy for quite some time. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leslie Trihey Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 Just now, Wincil said: I think Ngl I would feel the same way. A couple of people in my social circles are already packing up and moving on unless something changes. They have zero interest in starting from scratch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nika Talaj Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 2 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said: Wasn't there a post from a Tommy Linden earlier identifying as the head of Governance? Thank you, search is my friend. Good to know. Good luck, Tommy! I wonder who he reports to? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said: Right. Tommy manages Community ir something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nika Talaj Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Leslie Trihey said: A couple of people in my social circles are already packing up and moving on unless something changes. They have zero interest in starting from scratch. Again, I really would wait to see what shakes down by the May 20th Roundtable. Unless one's only interest in SL is a*eplay, why jump the gun? It may turn out that 'starting from scratch' is not necessary. Many stranger things have happened over the years. Edited May 4 by Nika Talaj 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 8 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: Yeah, I can assume that that cute My Little Pony avatar is really a human because RL My Little Ponies don't have opposable thumbs and can't type or use a mouse, but that's totally irrelevant to the context of SL. That's part of the reason I think there is more to the new policies regarding young appearing avatars then meets the eye. There are to my mind worse kinks out there so wondering why they are suddenly hot and heavy about childlike avatars. I still suspect this is only the start. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivienne Schell Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 Just now, Nika Talaj said: Again, I really would wait to see what shakes down by the May 20th Roundtable. Unless one's only interest in SL is a*eplay, why jump the gun? It may turn out that 'starting from scratch' is not necessary. It isn´t necessary when they follow the new rules as they are. These claims are just another bogus made up by people who want to proceed with their "business as usual", whatever that might be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts