So what changed in the Terms of Service?

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

1 minute ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

Better idea, have entire G continents and entire M continents, totally separated from each other. Of course a lot of people are gonna be upset about having to move, but its a small price to pay for keeping adults and children safe from each other

Sure have some new M rated continents, maybe carve out a few of those empty sims, drag them out to sea and classify them as M rated and let people build M rated communities if they want, but the majority of existing mainland should remain and be classified as G, because why are we disadvantaging residents in favour of content, content doesn't have feelings, it doesn't care where it can and can't go!

[AmeliaJ08]

10 minutes ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

LL are clearly intent on keeping child avatars and adult content separate, and I suspect everyone in this thread agrees with the spirit of their intentions if not their current methods.

My issue with their current approach is that it seems to be completely one-sided and only addresses the issue by limiting the use of the platform and the areas in which a portion of its user base can access.

Perhaps it would be a little fairer if they also attempted to ensure that the areas which are currently "grey" are safer to access for everyone in the community?

For instance, since we have a mixture of both G and M rated sims on a lot of the mainland why not reclassify all areas aside from Zindra to G rated only?  There are plenty of adult parcels that people could move their adult content to.  They would be safe from the scary little people and could run around naked and do whatever they please to each other!  Do we really need to have people running around naked with their genitalia out on the mainland anyway, how does that improve SLs reputation as a platform?

Sure, do something to keep child avatars away from adult content, but how about doing something to keep adult content away from child avatars too?

Because that would mean people find their private houses on G rated land and given so much furniture etc contains adult poses would suddenly need to move to A rated land.

Moderate is primarily so that people can be adults "behind closed doors" (which of course does not exist in SL but realistically if you take steps to ensure your activities are not public such as using parcel privacy settings, closed access etc it is fine) without needing to be on A rated land. As far as I'm aware even "behind closed doors" content that is in any way adult in nature is not permitted in G rated regions.

Equally nudity is not always sexual so moderate land has served to be a place where nudity is permitted and there is an expectation that people visiting M rated land might witness nudity, avert thine eyes if it offends type attitude.

 

 

Edited May 5 by AmeliaJ08

[BilliJo Aldrin]

Just now, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

Sure have some new M rated continents, maybe carve out a few of those empty sims, drag them out to sea and classify them as M rated and let people build M rated communities if they want, but the majority of existing mainland should remain and be classified as G, because why are we disadvantaging residents in favour of content, content doesn't have feelings, it doesn't care where it can and can't go!

Why? because G land is basically a waste of server space.

I have a better idea, Lets create a tiny separate G continent for the kids, and designate all existing continental sims (except Zindra)  as M

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

Just now, AmeliaJ08 said:

Because that would mean people find their private houses on G rated land and given so much furniture etc contains adult poses would suddenly need to find land on A rated land.

Moderate is primarily so that people can be adults "behind closed doors" (which of course does not exist in SL but realistically if you take steps to ensure your activities are not public such as using parcel privacy settings, closed access etc it is fine) without needing to be on A rated land.

Equally nudity is not always sexual so moderate land has served to be a place where nudity is permitted and there is an expectation that people visiting M rated land might witness nudity, avert thine eyes if it offends type attitude.

 

 

Right but all of those the things you mention can also be done on Adult rated land, you have more freedom there than you do on Moderate parcels, so it's not exactly an inconvenience to move to an adult rated parcel is it.

I guess some people are in favour of keeping adult content away from child avatars, but only as long as it doesn't disadvantage them?

[BilliJo Aldrin]

3 minutes ago, AmeliaJ08 said:

 As far as I'm aware even "behind closed doors" content that is in any way adult in nature is not permitted in G rated regions.

 

 

 

You are absolutely correct, but that doesn't stop many residents of G sims rezzing adult stuff anyway.

When I mention it to them, the reply is always the same "its ok its 4000 m up in the air in a skybox"

ummm no 😂

[BilliJo Aldrin]

2 minutes ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

Right but all of those the things you mention can also be done on Adult rated land, you have more freedom there than you do on Moderate parcels, so it's not exactly an inconvenience to move to an adult rated parcel is it.

I guess some people are in favour of keeping adult content away from child avatars, but only as long as it doesn't disadvantage them?

Do you have any idea how much an adult parcel on Zindra costs?

Your idea might work if LL quadrupled the size of Zindra, but they won't, because LL is in the long run trying to get away from adult content, not add to it.

[Juliett Beaumont]

6 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

Do you have any idea how much an adult parcel on Zindra costs?

Your idea might work if LL quadrupled the size of Zindra, but they won't, because LL is in the long run trying to get away from adult content, not add to it.

Do you know how less attractive land on Zindra is?

The non-PG bed, the picture at the wall and the youp*rn stream at the neighbors TV drives private land owners and management towards adult estates.

There is no "closed door"

Edited May 5 by Juliett Beaumont

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

1 minute ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

Do you have any idea how much an adult parcel on Zindra costs?

Your idea might work if LL quadrupled the size of Zindra, but they won't, because LL is in the long run trying to get away from adult content, not add to it.

Of course LL would need to provide a lot more Adult parcels and I don't expect they'd ever do anything like that, but at the same time their approach seems very one-sided and leaves a huge grey area in regards to where it's safe for child avatars to venture on the mainland.

It's very easy to cheer for restrictions when they don't apply to you personally even if they don't really do much to solve the underlying problem, but if LL were being fair about it they would apply further restrictions to adult behaviour/content and where it's permissible and I suspect a lot less people would be in this thread celebrating it.

[BilliJo Aldrin]

1 minute ago, Juliett Beaumont said:

Do you know how less attractive land on Zindra is?

The non-PG Bed, the picture at the wall and the youp*rn stream at the neighbors TV drives private land owners and management towards adult estates.

There is no "closed door"

I've never experienced a problem with the things you mentioned.

Zindra is the best. I don't see the messes that blight Moderate sims on Zindra.

But then again, i live in Kama City, a neat well laid out modern city with public transportation facilities, and lots of stores and entertainment venues. 😁

[BilliJo Aldrin]

4 minutes ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

Of course LL would need to provide a lot more Adult parcels and I don't expect they'd ever do anything like that, but at the same time their approach seems very one-sided and leaves a huge grey area in regards to where it's safe for child avatars to venture on the mainland.

It's very easy to cheer for restrictions when they don't apply to you personally even if they don't really do much to solve the underlying problem, but if LL were being fair about it they would apply further restrictions to adult behaviour/content and where it's permissible and I suspect a lot less people would be in this thread celebrating it.

These new restrictions don't apply to me in any way, but i'm not cheering for them.

In fact they disturb me because they do nothing to correct the problems they are supposedly trying to fix, and only represent a restriction of freedom of choice that sooner or later WILL affect us all

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

Just now, BilliJo Aldrin said:

These new restrictions don't apply to me in any way, but i'm not cheering for them.

In fact they disturb me because they do nothing to correct the problems they are supposedly trying to fix, and only represent a restriction of freedom of choice that sooner or later WILL affect us all

I try to choose my words carefully which is why I didn't say everyone in this thread was celebrating it, just that some of those who are would be far less happy about LL doing something to separate child avatars from adult content if it disadvantaged them to any degree, let alone to the degree that the current TOS changes effect others.

And yes, restricting the freedom of one part of a community will damage that community as a whole.

[Juliett Beaumont]

10 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

Do you have any idea how much an adult parcel on Zindra costs?

Your idea might work if LL quadrupled the size of Zindra, but they won't, because LL is in the long run trying to get away from adult content, not add to it.

...oh, and i don't think LL is trying to get away from adult content, it is a core business that gets a lot of real money in. And LL is a business not a pony ranch. I guess LL just likes to keep that business running in a legal way. And pedophilic disorder is a serious issue.

[Arielle Popstar]

1 minute ago, Juliett Beaumont said:

...oh, and i don't think LL is trying to get away from adult content, it is a core business that gets a lot of real money in. And LL is a business not a pony ranch. I guess LL just likes to keep that business running in a legal way. And pedophilic disorder is a serious issue.

Except that this does not deal in any way shape or form with the pedophilic issue.

[Lilbap]

4 minutes ago, Juliett Beaumont said:

And pedophilic disorder

I hear chairs wired for electricity cures that.

[Phil Deakins]

3 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Yeah, gives you an out to not have to take responsibility for people that get AR'ed. Leave it to Governance when we have heard already that they are on a warpath.

I never needed an out for something that was never my responsibility 

To my way of thinking, it seems clear. Have an avatar that is clearly a woman or a man, or have one that looks like a child. I can't imagine any reason to want one that could be taken either way, unless it's perhaps to see how near the edge one can get away with, which is, of course, just for the sake of it.

Arguing about it is irrelevant. The rules are the rules and, as far as adult avatars are concerned, they are easy to abide by, so I see no problem with that. If someone wants to have an avatar that looks 18, but could be perceived as 16 or 17 and unjustly penalised, tough. I have no sympathy with that thinking.

[Love Zhaoying]

47 minutes ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

Sure, do something to keep child avatars away from adult content, but how about doing something to keep adult content away from child avatars too?

Isn't Adult Content already restricted to "M" and "A" areas?  I was pretty sure that is how it works.

Or, do you mean some kind of "automatic enforcement"? That seems a little challenging, if so. 

As far as I understand: The "child avatars themselves" can set their "Rating" to "G", and so are not able to go into "M" and "G" Regions. I don't see how that would work in reverse for "Adult Content".

[Juliett Beaumont]

8 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Except that this does not deal in any way shape or form with the pedophilic issue.

 

4 minutes ago, Lilbap said:

I hear chairs wired for electricity cures that.

*ducks and covers...

sorry, if i wasn't right or clear at this point. I am not a native english.

...as i noted in this thread ages ago:

"I am pretty sure, almost any child avatars, who join into sexual orientated areas and also act as sexual objects in adult regions were driven by very adult players who try to justify their sexual orientation. This does not happen by accident. For me, this is just sick. 

To hunt, blame, kick, ban those people will just cover the problem, but will not clean up SL of those people. Most of them simply will re-spawn as an alt-ava.

So, if something feels sick, you must face to it, not cover it by pushing it aside. As in RL. It is always a better idea to face those peeps directly in their virtual eyes. Better talk and tell them about NOT to justify their sick role-play."

So, YES, in my opinion there is an issue and i talked to those people and ARed this frequent times.

[Love Zhaoying]

11 minutes ago, Lilbap said:

I hear chairs wired for electricity cures that.

I read this and found it very shocking.

[Innula Zenovka]

42 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

Just had a thought. Since all LL homes are on Moderate land, and adult content is allowed on Moderate land, can child avis safely own a Linden Home?

Or do they have to wear an adult form before they tp home?

RTFAQ

Quote

Q: If I have adult furniture/animations in my house in a Moderate rated region, will I need to remove it?

A: No, as long as the policy is abided by. Child avatars should not be engaging or participating in any event or location where nudity and/or sexual activity is present, encouraged and/or expected. To be clear, the presence of adult furniture or animations in content does not grant the expectation of use. Likewise, if you, as a child avatar, are traveling through Moderate rated regions which may have adult furniture but are not engaging with that content, there will not be a presumption of engagement with the adult animations based on your presence.

 

[Love Zhaoying]

I do see some discussion that hints "protecting Child avatars from Adult Content" is necessary because Child avatars may be driven by actual Children.   I think that is a topic not really covered by the TOS changes; the general assumption is that Child avatars are driven by Adults.

[Love Zhaoying]

2 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

RTFAQ

Quote

Q: If I have adult furniture/animations in my house in a Moderate rated region, will I need to remove it?

A: No, as long as the policy is abided by. Child avatars should not be engaging or participating in any event or location where nudity and/or sexual activity is present, encouraged and/or expected. To be clear, the presence of adult furniture or animations in content does not grant the expectation of use. Likewise, if you, as a child avatar, are traveling through Moderate rated regions which may have adult furniture but are not engaging with that content, there will not be a presumption of engagement with the adult animations based on your presence.

 

I like "RTFAQ", it's like "RTFM".

[Theresa Tennyson]

6 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

I never needed an out for something that was never my responsibility 

To my way of thinking, it seems clear. Have an avatar that is clearly a woman or a man, or have one that looks like a child. I can't imagine any reason to want one that could be taken either way, unless it's perhaps to see how near the edge one can get away with, which is, of course, just for the sake of it.

Arguing about it is irrelevant. The rules are the rules and, as far as adult avatars are concerned, they are easy to abide by, so I see no problem with that. If someone wants to have an avatar that looks 18, but could be perceived as 16 or 17 and unjustly penalised, tough. I have no sympathy with that thinking.

High school was that bad for you, huh?

Theresa Tennyson pats Phil's head.

I was describing the current headcanon drama in my family's SL town to a friend one day, particularly when my aunt was in a girl group back in the 80's, and they said the town was, "...a big John Hughes movie, basically."

Yes, I personally went to high school in the 80's - which is one reason why the whole, "Teenagers are innocent sexless children" thing makes me roll my eyes.

[Katherine Heartsong]

5 hours ago, Sydelle Zanzibar said:

This isn't about not liking the rules, it's about the rules not being clear enough to know if we like it or not.

I think there is just one fundamental thing that needs clarification ... what does modesty look like? The creators making child avatars like TD et al need clear visual examples so they can update their content to be in compliance.

The related issue is for LL to explain clearly what they mean when they describe this modesty panel; for example, how it can be made to work with BoM bodies and BoM skins "over-riding" the base skin layer. Are child avatars going to be sold non-BoM only, etc?

No one is ever going to get a satisfactory explanation that can be agreed on for what constitutes what a child avatar, under-18 avatar looks like. It's a factor of looks, behavior, clothing, sim you're on, groups, profile etc. So both quantitative and quantitative factors, and LL has already made that clear in their FAQ. The best advice I can give: If you think it's close to the line or over, back off and be sensible.

Stop advertising the grandpa/daddy/Lolita (play, not dress) sims in your profile, stop trying deliberately to look like a waif-like 13 year old in a string bikini with small breasts and pink runners referring to every dude in a suit as daddy, etc. I can point you to a sim right this second that is totally themed around this. Yes it's on Adult land but i think they're going to need to really look at who visits and what those often clearly under-18 avis look like before tumbling hard into trouble given these new guidelines.

To me, that's the one thing we're lacking, especially give that other platforms provide clear visual guidelines for this sort of thing.

But I also know that LL will provide these guides to clarify at some point soon.

Edited May 5 by Katherine Heartsong

[Innula Zenovka]

3 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Yeah, gives you an out to not have to take responsibility for people that get AR'ed. Leave it to Governance when we have heard already that they are on a warpath.

Since the new TOS were announced only last Thursday, May 2, and since the most contentious rules -- those concerning modesty panels -- don't come into effect until June 30, I wonder what you mean when you say "we have heard already that [Governance] are on a warpath."

Furthermore, we are told in the FAQ 

Quote

Q: Will Residents be immediately terminated if it is determined they are violating any part of the new policy?
A: Not all violations of the policy will result in an immediate termination. Depending upon the nature and severity of the violation, Governance has a suspension tree that is utilized to make attempts to educate the Resident first. However, if those attempts fail and the behavior is continued, it will result in termination. For the more severe offenses, the immediate action will still be to terminate their access to Second Life.

So what, specifically, have you heard since last Thursday that leads you to fear that Governance "are on a warpath" and was the person from whom you heard it drunk or sober at the time?

[Love Zhaoying]

3 minutes ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

stop trying deliberately to look like a waif-like 13 year old in a strong bikini with small breasts

By extension, either "stop" claiming that your avatar actually represents a 20 year-old, or just get over it when it is judged that your avatar "according to some official judgement" looks like a 13 year-old.