So what changed in the Terms of Service?

[Sammy Huntsman]

4 minutes ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

I really don't think it's worth equating what teens and children choose to wear in RL with what adults choose to attach to their avatars in SL.

Kids tend to be very susceptible to peer pressure and are easily influenced by social media etc, and as Coffee pointed out, tend to want to look older.  Everyone here is an adult and the only reason for them to wear certain clothes is to mimic the style that children wear in RL, and when they try to push certain boundaries and wear outfits which can be considered "sexualized" then it's hard to see any justification for it.

This is why you teach kids in RL to be themselves and don't feel pressured to be like everyone else. Than to Child avatars, just be themselves. They don't need to be like everyone else and look like everyone else. 

[Coffee Pancake]

Just now, Silverdown Seetan said:

What frustrates me is, all this is because of accusations of a blog post upon employee's of Linden Labs which I hope are not true and not even at normal users/residents

The lewd stuff was all false. It was a made up mismash off ancient pictures, faked screenshots and slipper slope assertions. None of it rose above the level of "hearsay". They threw a lot of mud in the hope it would stick or taint by association.

It should have been handled very differently by LL, but it wasn't, and here we are.

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, Rowan Amore said:

Seeing as how a 13 yr old is considered a child avatar, they couldn't BE on adult.land and certainly couldn't engage in adult activity.  They couldn't as child avatars before the new rules.

Oh, I know, but it felt like Luna was stating he would want to do all the adult activities on a child avatar. That is why I asked her to be more specific. 

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

Just now, Sammy Huntsman said:

This is why you teach kids in RL to be themselves and don't feel pressured to be like everyone else. Than to Child avatars, just be themselves. They don't need to be like everyone else and look like everyone else. 

Well you can try to teach them, but the media influencers seem to hold more sway these days, but the difficulties of RL parenting aren't really up for discussion so moving on...

In my personal opinion I think there is nothing wrong with wanting to roleplay as a child or teen in SL, but I draw the line at people roleplaying as a child "trying to be an adult".

[Pat Perth]

I submit that the new TOS do not go far enough. In the interest of public health, I propose code be added to the viewer such that anyone discovered to have warn a garment more than 8 hours will be immediately sent home, and not allowed to resume normal activities, until the offending (and offensive) garment is exchanged for something fresh and sweet-smelling.

[Dorientje Woller]

1 hour ago, Chery Amore said:

Well with Maitreya  if they don't want to get mixed up in the mess they can just say ... nopity, nope.  No updates planned. It won't lose them customers since the bodies have been bought.  Well other than new word of mouth customers that want to play younger teens.  Frankly I don't know where I'd land on that subject if I were a creator in that situation not specifically creating for underage avatars.

*Sigh* Why drag Maitreya into the conversation? Ah, 1 % of the users of this body is abusing it to make a teen alt with it, so we will scr*w over the 99% that is using the body as intended. Don't know if you know it, but the Legacy Perky body comes with a Petite Add-on included in the folder and with the correct deformers, which are available in SL in a wide range, you can make it so that it looks like a teen. In fact, you can make any adult body that is current available in SL to look like a minor with the correct skins, heads and deformers. Shall we ban all head creators, body makers, deformer creators from SL?

[Sammy Huntsman]

1 minute ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

In my personal opinion I think there is nothing wrong with wanting to roleplay as a child or teen in SL, but I draw the line at people roleplaying as a child "trying to be an adult".

I don't see a problem with that whatsoever. The problem isn't these child avatars, but them trying to be adult. 

[ErwinVonVlotho]

4 minutes ago, Silverdown Seetan said:

This is exactly why I said the modesty layer wont do anything.  If someone with a  sick mind thinks sick no change to a TOS for child avatars is going to mend the issue at hand.

You're not listening. What anyone thinks and how sick it may be is not the issue. The issue is that LL don't want screenshots of naked child avatars in the news, and they are making it as difficult as possible for anyone to have a naked child avatar without just banning them completely. The modesty layer is happening. That decision has been made and it isn't going to be walked back.

Where we are now is that the more people try to claim the modesty layer, nudity rules and ban from adult regions and content are unfair/excessive/impossible/easily circumvented, the more likely LL are to just throw up their hands and say "OK, you convinced us, this is too complicated. No more child avatars."

[Qie Niangao]

2 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

The lewd stuff was all false. It was a made up mismash off ancient pictures, faked screenshots and slipper slope assertions. None of it rose above the level of "hearsay". They threw a lot of mud in the hope it would stick or taint by association.

It should have been handled very differently by LL, but it wasn't, and here we are.

I agree that they were responding to garbage. But I'm not so sure they had much choice in how they responded, given the hearty appetite for that garbage. (That's not to say the specific responses are sensible, but broad brush, no matter how absurdly off-base the accusations, there's an eager market for any scandal involving Second Life. I don't think they could have dismissed it all with the contempt it deserved.)

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

Just now, Sammy Huntsman said:

I don't see a problem with that whatsoever. The problem isn't these child avatars, but them trying to be adult. 

Yes, and to clarify, I understand that if you're role-playing as a teen then you may want to rebel, etc. (as teens tend to do) but I think that can be done without resorting to wearing revealing outfits or acting in an "inappropriate" manner.

[brodiac90]

6 minutes ago, ErwinVonVlotho said:

You're not listening. What anyone thinks and how sick it may be is not the issue. The issue is that LL don't want screenshots of naked child avatars in the news, and they are making it as difficult as possible for anyone to have a naked child avatar without just banning them completely. The modesty layer is happening. That decision has been made and it isn't going to be walked back.

Where we are now is that the more people try to claim the modesty layer, nudity rules and ban from adult regions and content are unfair/excessive/impossible/easily circumvented, the more likely LL are to just throw up their hands and say "OK, you convinced us, this is too complicated. No more child avatars."

Yes, it's very much get with the program and be seen as a solution otherwise you're part of the problem. I don't think people understand that this is a purge. A much needed one apparently from what I've heard about some people's experiences with bad child avatars in this thread. Like ripping off a band aid though, I hope LL does this quick and hard and get's all the changes it needs to do out of the way. SL won't be the same afterwards but hopefully it will be a safer place for child avatars where they are still welcome. Who knows, if we can get rid of the bad apples, people might actually start being more positive to the good child avatars. Maybe that's just naivety and wishful thinking? It's better than dispairing though... 

Edited May 7 by brodiac90

[Vivienne Schell]

6 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

I agree that they were responding to garbage. But I'm not so sure they had much choice in how they responded, given the hearty appetite for that garbage. (That's not to say the specific responses are sensible, but broad brush, no matter how absurdly off-base the accusations, there's an eager market for any scandal involving Second Life. I don't think they could have dismissed it all with the contempt it deserved.)

Speculation. This is an ongoing process which includes possible legal consequences for the involved parties. Publishing any concluding and official statement on the specifics of that at this point would be careless. Basically, no one outside the upper management and the board knows anything specific yet. And if, then someone leaked something and that also could end very badly for the one who leaked it.

Edited May 7 by Vivienne Schell

[Coffee Pancake]

1 minute ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

I draw the line at people roleplaying as a child "trying to be an adult".

Childhood is about trying on  different shades of adulthood, that's a corner stone of our entire society. We teach our kids to literally try it and see if they like it, and fake it till they make it. However, irrespective of what can and does happen IRL, it doesn't and shouldn't extend to include sexual activities here.

Everything else should be allowed though.

I did a lot of dumb stuff in my teens. i was not the prim and proper well behaved child my mother wanted. That was the point.

 

 

[BilliJo Aldrin]

16 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

Can we stop watering down that term please? 

why?

[Sammy Huntsman]

2 minutes ago, brodiac90 said:

Yes, it's very much get with the program and be seen as a solution otherwise you're part of the problem. I don't think people understand that this is a purge. A much needed one apparently from what I've heard about some people's experiences with bad child avatars in this thread. Like ripping off a band aid though, I hope LL does this quick and hard and get's all the changes it needs to do out of the way. SL won't be the same afterwards but hopefully it will be a safer place for child avatars where they are still welcome. Who knows, if we can get rid of the bad apples, people might actually start being more positive to the good child avatars. Maybe that's just naivety and wishful thinking? It's better than dispairing though... 

You will always be welcome to me. I honestly don't care how others RP or express themselves. Just follow the TOS and we are fine

[Sammy Huntsman]

2 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

why?

Simple because it's like the boy who cried wolf. It will get to the point, that people will wonder if they mean the actual thing or whatever this is. 

[Madi Melodious]

2 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

The second is even more lawyerly: Even the FAQ doesn't actually say anybody must wear the products with the baked-in magic underwear. Here's the text:

((snipped for brevity)) 

You must be a lawyer in RL.  

This is actually a pretty good compromise and its  very workable for everyone.  In a situation where a child is expected to be nude, such is in the long ago suggested bath time example, the modesty paneled skin is required.   Result no nude child, so no tos violation.  

In public all child av must wear appropriate cloths.  No nude child avatars, so no tos violation.

This is actually a win win for everyone.  LL gets their naked child free grid, new content gets created for child av's, people get to keep years and huge dollar amounts of inventory.  

Bonus if the lab comes out and says "yeah that is what we mean" they get off pitch fork and torch crowd's radar.  

[Chery Amore]

5 minutes ago, Dorientje Woller said:

*Sigh* Why drag Maitreya into the conversation? Ah, 1 % of the users of this body is abusing it to make a teen alt with it, so we will scr*w over the 99% that is using the body as intended. Don't know if you know it, but the Legacy Perky body comes with a Petite Add-on included in the folder and with the correct deformers, which are available in SL in a wide range, you can make it so that it looks like a teen. In fact, you can make any adult body that is current available in SL to look like a minor with the correct skins, heads and deformers. Shall we ban all head creators, body makers, deformer creators from SL?

I was indicating if they don't want to get involved and as a creator they don't have to make a body with modesty layers... and yes that goes for any other body makers out there that are making bodies that teens are wearing. I didn't say they should or shouldn't that is of course their choice. Personally I'd not want to be associated with it yes, but that's because once I slapped on those modesty layers and put it out for others to use I'd be serving that cliental knowingly... and yes I wouldn't want that headache that could stem from that.

I hope someone does make bodies, skins ect for that customer base though.

You can't bury your head in the sand though that you will have to be compliant and one of those body makers will have to update or you will have to move to a compliant body if you play as underage.

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

I love how I say modesty and you go for reaching to the Victorian era. Lol. Like I mean 80s and 90s modesty on kids. How do you get that from what I said? Lol 

Maybe childhood trauma experienced during the Victorian era?

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

4 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Childhood is about trying on  different shades of adulthood, that's a corner stone of our entire society. We teach our kids to literally try it and see if they like it, and fake it till they make it. However, irrespective of what can and does happen IRL, it doesn't and shouldn't extend to include sexual activities here.

Everything else should be allowed though.

I did a lot of dumb stuff in my teens. i was not the prim and proper well behaved child my mother wanted. That was the point.

 

 

Yes, as I said in my subsequent post, accurately roleplaying as a child will of course have an element of rebellion and "wanting to be an adult", but the line should be drawn at any activities that sexualize the character they're portraying.

[Love Zhaoying]

38 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

This is why the whole thing of children, whether they are avatars in SL or Real life, are sexualized.

I thought the answer was always "money", because "sex sells".  If I'm right, we just need to remove any profit from "teen/child sexualization" in Second Life. 

People can go somewhere else for their filthy lucre, because our TOS will be the bestest to protect us and our teen/child avatars!

 

[Sammy Huntsman]

1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I thought the answer was always "money", because "sex sells".  If I'm right, we just need to remove any profit from "teen/child sexualization" in Second Life. 

People can go somewhere else for their filthy lucre, because our TOS will be the bestest to protect us and our teen/child avatars!

 

I mean I do think they need to be more transparent in their FAQ and maybe put more questions that we have asked in this Forum post. As of right now, it's okay, but it's not the best. 

[Youri Ashton]

Still don't see why we have to change as a collective just because a few cause trouble. Don't get me wrong, I said multiple times now that it would have very bad things in store for people who choose to be short as they might be short irl, conflicts towards specific groups of people (Asian people for example) and aside from that there is still a thing around tinies (and similar), anime in general and for that matter also freedom of speech and freedom to be who you want to be in SL.

The last thing being the very foundation of SL to start with.
If people are limited to what they can and can not look like gives all kinds of trouble.
NO, this does NOT mean I like to condone the horrible actions specific parties love to do while abusing the SL platform.
I however do wish to repeat that we should be free to look how we want to look, this is part of the freedom of imagination that SL is founded upon and should remain as the source of imagination is the very thing that drives SL as a whole. Destroy that and you will see a lot of people disappear and never return. With SL already having so few roaming around on it's servers, you would think this is a huge problem financially for Linden Lab as well.

So the voice of reason, YES do something about the individuals that abuse the platform. But NO do NOT block anyone from looking the way they wish. Should baby/child avi's be banned, NO! You simply can not punish everyone for the actions of a few. I rather wish to suggest a alternative to the problem. Which happens to be active investigations to the known groups, allow parties such as FBI infiltrate these groups over time so they can also take down small groups and anyone else that is very clearly active in such things. Meaning having sexual contact with what are clearly child avi's.

Linden Lab please do not punish everyone based on what a few are doing. Punish the right individuals instead.

[Coffee Pancake]

Just now, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

but the line should be drawn at any activities that sexualize the character they're portraying

Children's beauty pageants are a thing. A day time TV thing. "sexualize" is far to broad a term to have any practical application.

The rules prohibit nudity, accessing adult locations, engaging in or actively soliciting sexual activity, that's the line.

Everything up to that line must be ok, and that's going to include a lot of stuff some will object to.

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, Youri Ashton said:

Still don't see why we have to change as a collective just because a few cause trouble. Don't get me wrong, I said multiple times now that it would have very bad things in store for people who choose to be short as they might be short irl, conflicts towards specific groups of people (Asian people for example) and aside from that there is still a thing around tinies (and similar), anime in general and for that matter also freedom of speech and freedom to be who you want to be in SL.

The last thing being the very foundation of SL to start with.
If people are limited to what they can and can not look like gives all kinds of trouble.
NO, this does NOT mean I like to condone the horrible actions specific parties love to do while abusing the SL platform.
I however do wish to repeat that we should be free to look how we want to look, this is part of the freedom of imagination that SL is founded upon and should remain as the source of imagination is the very thing that drives SL as a whole. Destroy that and you will see a lot of people disappear and never return. With SL already having so few roaming around on it's servers, you would think this is a huge problem financially for Linden Lab as well.

So the voice of reason, YES do something about the individuals that abuse the platform. But NO do NOT block anyone from looking the way they wish. Should baby/child avi's be banned, NO! You simply can not punish everyone for the actions of a few. I rather wish to suggest a alternative to the problem. Which happens to be active investigations to the known groups, allow parties such as FBI infiltrate these groups over time so they can also take down small groups and anyone else that is very clearly active in such things. Meaning having sexual contact with what are clearly child avi's.

Linden Lab please do not punish everyone based on what a few are doing. Punish the right individuals instead.

I don't think adding a modesty bit limits how you can express yourself at all.