Theresa Ravenheart Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 3 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said: ewww you visit G rated sims, that's an AR waiting to happen. Better clean up your profile first, that will get you ARed on G land I avoid them at all costs to be honest, but my point is still made. If I want to leave the comfort of my home, I dress however that land rating expects me to dress/appear. It's not a big deal for me to cover up for 5 mins to run to a store on G land. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kei Niosaki Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 4 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said: I said no such thing. What I said was "is it THAT important for you to interact with those people as a child avatar on A rated land" You are still you and they are still they behind the avatar. If it's that important, have them visit you. Also, if you are going to break the TOS might as go all the way and continue to visit them. I mean it doesn't matter to you about the TOS right? Yeah but wont break it in a way that makes all kids look bad, If i go to Adult sims it reflects badly on the whole child community and i dont want that. My skin issue as said many times is next to impossible for anyone to ever see but myself so it effects no one but me. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivienne Schell Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 11 minutes ago, Kei Niosaki said: just because a sim is rated adult doesnt mean adult activities are taking place. many friends simply just rent a plot of land for a home on a sim rated adult, Why adult well that plot of land was a good price at the time. So Please stop fishing for reason to make child avies on adult land look bad Not a matter of looking good or bad. Matter of the ToS. Residents presenting as Child Avatars shall be prohibited from the following: Entering any Region rated Adult. Residents must change to a non-child or non-childlike avatar to visit Adult rated regions. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BilliJo Aldrin Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 Just now, Theresa Ravenheart said: I avoid them at all costs to be honest, but my point is still made. If I want to leave the comfort of my home, I dress however that land rating expects me to dress/appear. It's not a big deal for me to cover up for 5 mins to run to a store on G land. If a store is on G land, i just won't go, G has far too many restrictions for my tastes. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleMe Jewell Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 20 minutes ago, frankyjake2333 said: Good Evening. While I’m not a lawyer I do have a good deal of knowledge working with the law. I’m also not a second life player but I do have a close friend that is heavily involved in the platform. She uses it as a form of therapy for a abusive childhood trauma through roleplaying. I have just spent the last two nights watching her have an emotional break down on about this issue. I wanted to post some comments but was begged not too on her account. So, I’ve created my own account to post a comment as an outside observer. I’m sure what I’m about to post will ruffle more than a few feathers and the post itself will be taken down immediately. If you are reading this, take a screenshot of it and post it everywhere; circulate it on reddit and in discord channels. My first comment is to Linden Lab itself. The motives behind the new Terms of Service are complete rubbish, keep that in mind as you read on. You had a scare and found nothing wrong but decided to deprive thousands of users of the joy they have had over years and anger them. How does this make good business sense? When your own internal investigation found nothing wrong the correct thing to do would have been to proceed with business as usual. You found nothing wrong, but you go out of your way to break something that helps so many people. That speaks very poorly of your management skills. But let’s get to the meat of the post. To the people that are suffering have you thought of legal action? Just read the entire post before you rule it out. I’ve looked over the Linden Labs terms of service (tos). They are not as bullet proof as they would have you believe. To an outsider this seems to be a poorly run company trying to recover from a internal scandal and is doing it very poorly. From my point of view there are two grounds for legal action not covered by the TOS. The first case for legal action is on the grounds of emotional distress. I’m sure many of you are already shaking your heads, but there are real grounds here. I watched my friend break down over two days. Her therapist is greatly concerned. The family role playing was assisting in her recovery from trauma. Now that has been removed as an option for no good reason. From reading the forums there are others here that feel the same way. To Linden Lab, I would remind you of what state you are in. One of the most liberal states in the country and place where civil law tends to lead to the plaintive in these cases. If this was to go to trial and it could, one therapist addressing a jury about emotional injuries and what do you think the outcome would be? Second, I would also remind you of one of the cases in California, the OJ Simpson case. In a criminal proceeding he was found not guilty but in a civil case he was. That is because in California the requirements for finding faults are a lot lower. Since this would be a civil case on emotional trauma you wouldn’t have your term of service to hide behind. Let’s look at the other grounds for legal action, and that would be Second Life as a source of income. Second Life is unique in the way that you can generate a source of income off of the platform. This is a good thing as it allows people that don’t have a place in the general workforce to have a productive and creative life. When you deprive those of that opportunity through no fault of their own, but due to an internal scandal, that raises certain questions that could be legally challenging. Linden Lab is within their rights to remove someone from the platform that does violate the rules, and this could and does lead to a loss of income for that person. The question arises when they change the rules and deprive someone of a source of income, which is what they are doing. When you change the rules and deprive someone of a source of income that they have become dependent on, well that could look very different in the eyes of the law. Your terms of service give you some shield, but those terms of service become null and void if they violate the law. The laws on income and the right to work in some states, California for one, are very clear. Now for the standard disclaimer, I am not a lawyer so what I’m expressing is my own options. But with that being said, if you are a victim of these new rules I would come together on platforms outside of Linden Labs control, reddit and Discord. Talk it over. If you live in California and have the means reach out to a legal consultant and show them this document. Let them tell you if there is a case here. I feel there are grounds on both reasons I have provided. To Linden Lab, if you are reading this, I would advise you to reconsider the new policies you have put in place. There is no legitimate reason for you to do so. You are causing a lot of stress and trauma for no reason and if it was to go to court there is a very good probability that you would lose the case. I’ve looked over some of the legal cases proceeding that have affected your company over the years and you do not have a good track record of winning in court. You have created a unique environment that allows people with physical and emotional disabilities to thrive and gain some semblance of a normal life. By removing this from them for no fault of their own that does indeed make you liable. According to your own site, and the law, a income source above a certain level require you to report the income proceeding to government sources for tax reasons. This makes income from Second Life a legitimate source. There are several civil organizations out there that might take issue with depriving people with disabilities of that source of income through no fault of their own. My not so legal advice to Linden Lab would be to walk back the new rules, for reevaluation, then quietly forget about them. At least consult the parts of the community you are doing most harm too and try to work with them instead of just using a hammer to beat them in to submission. As an outside observer, I don’t see this as a battle you can win without causing undue harm. Quoted just cuz. Nobody is depriving anyone of anything, especially income. I mean, surely you are not suggesting that the child avatar made income doing adult things. LL simply says that child avatars cannot go to Adult land. They cannot run around nude - they will have to have a modesty layer (and that has not been fully defined). Those are the only new things really. They've never been allowed around adult / sex content. If your friend is in distress over this, then your friend might actually need more time outside of SL to work on their issues. 17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BilliJo Aldrin Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 Just now, Vivienne Schell said: Not a matter of looking good or bad. Matter of the ToS. Residents presenting as Child Avatars shall be prohibited from the following: Entering any Region rated Adult. Residents must change to a non-child or non-childlike avatar to visit Adult rated regions. It is what it is, kids have to suck it up and follow the rule, or risk getting ARed and banned 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivienne Schell Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 12 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said: I'm hoping for the best.. Because the worst was no fun the last time around.. But then again, the land owners won't have to worry about things this time.. So probably won't be that bad this time around with all that kind of panic not going on.. There is no panic going on. A very, very few try to simulate a tsunami which appears to be a lame duck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleMe Jewell Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 27 minutes ago, Kei Niosaki said: 32 minutes ago, Theresa Ravenheart said: But your "rare" visits are against the TOS now, if you are a child/teen avatar, you may not go to Adult land at all anymore, no matter the circumstance. Yes i know that an i sadly i cant visit those friends home anymore unless i log on my adult avi. You can't have time with them anywhere else? If they will only socialize with you at their adult location, they may not be the friends you think they are. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theresa Ravenheart Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 2 minutes ago, Kei Niosaki said: Yeah but wont break it in a way that makes all kids look bad, If i go to Adult sims it reflects badly on the whole child community and i dont want that. My skin issue as said many times is next to impossible for anyone to ever see but myself so it effects no one but me. Have you thought about the fact that LL can see what you are wearing? So someone reports you, falsely or not, then that starts a review. IF LL finds you wearing items/outfits that do not have bodies/skins that meet the new requirements that you can still be banned; and with everything being said here, anyone could report you. I'm not saying this is going to happen, but it could and the results would be the same, you would lose your account. Let the meeting on May 20th happen and see what rolls out with body/skin updates before your put your little child avatar foot down and PUBLICLY state that you will not comply to the TOS, which you have already done several times! I'm not saying this to pick on you, I don't want anyone to lose their accounts over something that could be avoided. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleMe Jewell Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 17 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said: The guy I was responding to said he had a brothel on moderate land which is not allowed, advertised or not. Ahhh - missed that part entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BilliJo Aldrin Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 You know, considering I never see a kid, and never interact with kids none of these new rules will have any impact on my Second Life. My only concern is that with more and more rules regarding what is not acceptable, Second Life will eventually end up as a place no one wants to be. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceka Cianci Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 1 minute ago, Vivienne Schell said: There is no panic going on. A very, very few try to simulate a tsunami which appears to be a lame duck. Ya, the big thing last time was mostly with land owners and a bunch of fear mongering.. If anything, those that usually would panic ended up with more protection from their fear this time around.. So ya, I agree. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nika Talaj Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 21 minutes ago, frankyjake2333 said: Good Evening. <long screed> Your friend's sad story puzzles me. Are you under the impression that she can no longer engage in family roleplay in SL? If so, that is false. Unless her family roleplay involves se*ual activity as a child, she will be able to do it. If your friend's therapy does involve painful re-enactments, then her presumably accredited therapist (immersive re-enactment is a risky therapeutic mode that should not be attempted lightly) can try contacting Linden Lab and petition them for permission to conduct these sessions privately, on her own region (which the therapist would presumably pay for). In fact, this could be attempted without even consulting LL - since the therapy sessions, with their rule infractions, would not be visible to anyone who is not part of the therapy, there would be little risk that LL would ever know about it. But really, this is something that is better suited to an Open Sim environment, where the therapist could completely control the sessions. As for the legal counsel you've provided, I can only say that anyone who follows legal advice from a person who cannot spell "plaintiff" should proceed with much caution. 16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceka Cianci Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 3 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said: You know, considering I never see a kid, and never interact with kids none of these new rules will have any impact on my Second Life. My only concern is that with more and more rules regarding what is not acceptable, Second Life will eventually end up as a place no one wants to be. We'll all end up on the streets hookin for dimes just tah git some shews!! \o/ 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathlen Onyx Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 4 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said: You know, considering I never see a kid, and never interact with kids none of these new rules will have any impact on my Second Life. My only concern is that with more and more rules regarding what is not acceptable, Second Life will eventually end up as a place no one wants to be. If I had a nickel for every time I heard that..... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theresa Tennyson Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 46 minutes ago, Vivienne Schell said: The FAQ does not matter. What matters are the ToS. And the ToS are perfectly precise. 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. Child avatars where the focal point of the body is on the breasts, pelvis, or buttocks So, if you wear an approved skin with an approved avatar you're wearing two sets of underwear that may or may not line up? Theresa Tennyson checks her laundry detergent supply. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 3 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said: Ahhh - missed that part entirely. Still wouldn't be a problem, IMO. As long as I don't advertise, a few forum members and I could rent a moderate parcel, toss up a 4 bedroom skybox, restrict access and visibility and bring home paying customers. 1 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceka Cianci Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 3 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said: If I had a nickel for every time I heard that..... Freaking inflation!! \o/ 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivienne Schell Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 1 minute ago, BilliJo Aldrin said: You know, considering I never see a kid, and never interact with kids none of these new rules will have any impact on my Second Life. My only concern is that with more and more rules regarding what is not acceptable, Second Life will eventually end up as a place no one wants to be. You apparently missed the 2007 scandal and it´s fallout. Even that did not turn SL into some puritan wasteland. Also, the new regulations, targeting a very small but very active and phoney minority exclusively, are completely insignificant to anyone not participating in the child play circuit as player or benefitting by it as creator, except the vast majority of adult rated sim owners. And these sigh in relief because they finally do not have to do the work of keeping their sims out of child trouble anymore and/or finally got official clarification. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juliett Beaumont Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 This is about child avatars - not RL kids. If a kid likes to sneak into a sexual orientated adult region? That kid surly will act as an adult character with a fake adult profile. Who will approve this? It is the internet. This TOS change does not address kids. This address adult RP. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BilliJo Aldrin Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 1 minute ago, Vivienne Schell said: You apparently missed the 2007 scandal and it´s fallout. Even that did not turn SL into some puritan wasteland. Also, the new regulations, targeting a very small but very active and phoney minority exclusively, are completely insignificant to anyone not participating in the child play circuit as player or benefitting by it as creator, except the vast majority of adult rated sim owners. And these sigh in relief because they finally do not have to do the work of keeping their sims out of child trouble anymore and/or finally got official clarification. I didn't join until 2010 😁 As i said, any new rules, while not affecting me, might be the start of a trend that will squeeze all the life out of Second Life. Ahh, but don't worry, be happy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 2 minutes ago, Juliett Beaumont said: This is about child avatars - not RL kids. If a kid likes to sneak into a sexual orientated adult region? That kid surly will act as an adult character with a fake adult profile. Who will approve this? It is the internet. This TOS change does not address kids. This address adult RP. They did say they will be addressing RL age verification at some point... These efforts include strengthening some of our community and employee policies as well as evaluating improvements to our age verification process. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleMe Jewell Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 10 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said: Still wouldn't be a problem, IMO. As long as I don't advertise, a few forum members and I could rent a moderate parcel, toss up a 4 bedroom skybox, restrict access and visibility and bring home paying customers. Yes, but you surely wouldn't come to the forums and announce that you had a brothel on your moderate land. By definition, a brothel does promote sexual conduct and that is not allowed on Moderate. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BilliJo Aldrin Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 1 minute ago, Juliett Beaumont said: This is about child avatars - not RL kids. If a kid likes to sneak into a sexual orientated adult region? That kid surly will act as an adult character with a fake adult profile. Who will approve this? It is the internet. This TOS change does not address kids. This address adult RP. That's very true, rl kids don't join second life and have a kid avatar. The create an adult avatar. The new rules will keep adults pretending to be kids out of A rated sims, but won't keep real life kids out of A rated sims. LOL way to go LL 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madi Melodious Posted May 5 Share Posted May 5 (edited) I was just subjected to adult conversation in a public forum about scripting. What does the TOS have to say about that? Do I need to run and flee because I'm a small avatar? Am I allowed to comment on such subjects? Or should I just stay quiet and not heard? Edited May 5 by Madi Melodious 2 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts