So what changed in the Terms of Service?

[Leslie Trihey]

4 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

And, tragically ALL ADULT CONTENT IN SL DISAPPEARED!!!!

No. It didn't, actually, did it? What it did mean is that my G-rated sewing circle parcel no longer had to sit next to a Dolcett dungeon.

This is just not that radical a change. It just isn't!

Yes, thankfully the attempt failed. And like I said, I hope I'm wrong about this being a slippery slope.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I have a very very thin notebook in which I keep track of the times that happened.

Actually, it's a matchbook.

I actually do have an avatar over 7 ft tall.

 

She's 7 ft 3, it's the "Bride of Dr. Zalistein's Monster" that I wear during Spooky month. The oone that's won me 4or 5k ls in Halloween Contests in Clubs over the last few years.

It's almost always the tallest avatar in the room.

 

[Flea Yatsenko]

Just now, Love Zhaoying said:

Why does that matter? They can ban you any time from their land for any reason; that is not changing and has nothing to do with the TOS.

What does it have to do with the TOS changes?

I don't have any interest in being a young looking AV. But I do understand why some people in this thread are worried someone is going to report them in the new ToS because they are doing naughty things playing as an adult and someone thinks they are a child. Given there's no solid rules I understand their concern.

[Sammy Huntsman]

47 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

So what law changed in the last few months that suddenly required this amendment to the ToS? It has been ok for 20 years and now isn't without some significant external change?

People do realize, that CP always constitutes actual children depicted in sexual ways. The only way that "drawings or art" could be hit, is if say the person who made the image made an exact likeness of a real child. So as weird as the anime or cartoon stuff is, that is not actual CP. 

[Wincil]

I wouldn't go around assuming that every person on the internet is a child the mental gymnastics though. 

[Arielle Popstar]

6 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I have a very very thin notebook in which I keep track of the times that happened.

Actually, it's a matchbook.

The Matchbook betting app to bet on whether it is true or not?

[Rowan Amore]

1 minute ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

People do realize, that CP always constitutes actual children depicted in sexual ways. The only way that "drawings or art" could be hit, is if say the person who made the image made an exact likeness of a real child. So as weird as the anime or cartoon stuff is, that is not actual CP. 

That's incorrect.  CP laws in many countries where SL is used have laws against cartoon (virtual) depictions of CP.

[Sorciaa]

2 minutes ago, Wincil said:

I wouldn't go around assuming that every person on the internet is a child the mental gymnastics though. 

you forget the rules of the internet..

 

 the men are men

the women are men

and the kids are federal agents

[Scylla Rhiadra]

7 minutes ago, Leslie Trihey said:

Yes, thankfully the attempt failed. And like I said, I hope I'm wrong about this being a slippery slope.

Every new rule is a potential "slippery slope." Even relaxing rules can seem like slippery slopes in some contexts.

I think the intent of these new rules is very clear, and that's particularly signaled by the fact that they could have been much more restrictive than they actually were. And, yes, there are some in-world who will go overboard on ARs now, but they are likely the same people who were over-compensating about child avatars before. The fact that LL clearly does not want to get rid of child RP (because they could have just done that if they wanted) means that absurd ARs are going to get dustbinned. Governance is going to be overworked for the next few months, but they are not going to be sweeping the grid clean of child avatars.

Edited May 4 by Scylla Rhiadra
Missing word

[LittleMe Jewell]

15 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Seems like the thread is stuck on "wash", "rinse", "repeat".

There is no washing going on and very little rinse

[Phil Deakins]

4 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

People can be banned from the forums and SL for days/weeks over posts in the forums - including personal attacks.

I know from personal experience (due to a post that was seen as a personal attack).

And just ask @Phil Deakins how many times he's been banned from the forums & inworld for posts.

I don't know if it's any different these days but there was a time, under the same mods as now, when we could easily be banned from both here and inworld for something and nothing - and for nothing at all. Getting the bans overturned , which did happen, didn't help because it couldn't happen until after the ban, of course. I've no idea if the brains that did that have gained some common sense since then, or not.

Edited May 4 by Phil Deakins

[Sammy Huntsman]

3 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

That's incorrect.  CP laws in many countries where SL is used have laws against cartoon (virtual) depictions of CP.

Sure there are some places that can't tell reality from fantasy, that is the issue I see. 

[LittleMe Jewell]

8 minutes ago, Wincil said:

I wouldn't go around assuming that every person on the internet is a child  

Exaggeration much?

Nowhere in this entire thread, (or anywhere else in these forums) did anyone ever say "every person on the internet is a child".

 

For some though, if the shoe fits.

[Innula Zenovka]

3 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

That's incorrect.  CP laws in many countries where SL is used have laws against cartoon (virtual) depictions of CP.

And my country, the UK, is one of them.  Though since the offence is possessing a prohibited image of a child, I think it would be an issue only if someone took a screenshot (and, of course, if they didn't, there would be nothing to show the court to say "this is the image we're complaining about").

However, it's the SL Terms of Service that matter here, not the criminal law in any particular jurisdiction, I think.

[Coffee Pancake]

3 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

There is no washing going on and very little rinse

Some are trying to work the problem .. some are making sure they mark their territory.

[Wincil]

Adult's will be Adults and Kids' will be Kids.  

[Rowan Amore]

3 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

Sure there are some places that can't tell reality from fantasy, that is the issue I see. 

Such as the UK and Canada?  They have those laws.

[Love Zhaoying]

Can we fast-forward to 6 months from now, where nothing has changed except the new rules are "in force"?

I think that will be the next "golden age of quiet and peace".

 

Edited May 4 by Love Zhaoying

[Rowan Amore]

5 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

And my country, the UK, is one of them.  Though since the offence is possessing a prohibited image of a child, I think it would be an issue only if someone took a screenshot (and, of course, if they didn't, there would be nothing to show the court to say "this is the image we're complaining about").

However, it's the SL Terms of Service that matter here, not the criminal law in any particular jurisdiction, I think.

Yes, the ToS is the law here.  The laws in your country and others are probably the reason LL originally implemented the ***** restrictions.  Some of those laws also include create as well as distribute.

Edited May 4 by Rowan Amore

[Wincil]

12 minutes ago, Sorciaa said:

you forget the rules of the internet..

 

 the men are men

the women are men

and the kids are federal agents

  Really? 🤨

[Anna Salyx]

2 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

The IMs are most definitely saved on the server, not encrypted (even if you have told the viewer to save your IMs to your computer).  They could have programs that scan IMs looking for certain words and then if found, a person would then have to manually read things to confirm what did or did not happen.

According to legend (ie: apocryphally), way back in the grand old days of the UseNet "forums", one of the Secret Masters Of The Internet (SMOTI) who went by the handle Kibo would regularly grep the news spool for anyone who dared to utter his name across the 5000 subgroups and would reply to each such post personally. 

The truth is that he really did do this, but probably only in those news groups he was personally subscribed to and not the entirety of the UseNet spool.  But you know how legends grow.  This was in the late 90's mind you, but in the decades that have followed the ability to scrub collective data files and conversation logs for specific grains of metaphorical rice has only gotten scarily efficient and laser focused.  So, it's not a matter of "they could have programs" but rather "yes, they do have programs" that can do that.  Do they do it on the regular? Ostensibly I'd say not just for plausible deniability reasons, but should the situation arise, yeah it's gonna happen.

The company I worked for at one time kept customer activity on live storage for 6 month, and on archival tape for 5 years. This was a regulatory requirement.  I fully expect that Second Life, via Linden Lab, has a very detailed data retention policy for key records for investigatory purposes.

[Leslie Trihey]

Just now, Rowan Amore said:

Find one instance here in this thread or these forums where anyone has said any of that.  I'll wait.

Actions speak louder then words. :^) Several pages of people not being able to tell the difference child avatar and an anime avatar head for instance, which I'm sure you were a participant in.

Page 96 for example someone saying that a picture that someone posted of a girl with bunny ears "body looks like a twelve year old with bewbs", being clearly an petite adult body.

I'm not scouring 97+ pages of a multi-day discussion to find more examples. "Sorry."

Some people in here, not necessarily you, have incredibly strange idea's what constitutes as a young av. So I wouldn't trust their judgement, like at all. Sorry, not sorry.

[Sammy Huntsman]

4 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

Such as the UK and Canada?  They have those laws.

I live in Canada Lol. And to be honest with you, our government is so detached from reality. So I wouldn't be surprised that it is a thing. Lol 

[Sammy Huntsman]

8 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

And my country, the UK, is one of them.  Though since the offence is possessing a prohibited image of a child, I think it would be an issue only if someone took a screenshot (and, of course, if they didn't, there would be nothing to show the court to say "this is the image we're complaining about").

However, it's the SL Terms of Service that matter here, not the criminal law in any particular jurisdiction, I think.

Do I agree with the new policy in SL? Yes, wholeheartedly. However, I think that my government is so detached from reality. But I also don't look at ***** as weird as it is, as CSAM or CSA. That is just taking it too far and watering down those terms. 

[Rowan Amore]

2 minutes ago, Leslie Trihey said:

Actions speak louder then words. :^) Several pages of people not being able to tell the difference child avatar and an anime avatar head for instance, which I'm sure you were a participant in.

Page 96 for example someone saying that a picture that someone posted of a girl with bunny ears "body looks like a twelve year old with bewbs", being clearly an petite adult body.

I'm not scouring 97+ pages of a multi-day discussion to find more examples. "Sorry."

Some people in here, not necessarily you, have incredibly strange idea's what constitutes as a young av. So I wouldn't trust their judgement, like at all. Sorry, not sorry.

Yes, how one sees a child avatar is ambiguous.  I've said so myself.  But on the other side, some people also see something as adult.that others do not.  It goes both ways and why it will always be a judgement call for users and LL.

What has not been said is that in order to be an adult, one must be 7 feet tall with giant boobs and ass or men need to be muscle bound and hairy.  Not once, I can guarantee.  THAT is what I took issue with.