Rowan Amore Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 3 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said: Unfortunately, it won't matter if it is non-human, the TOS talks about 'presenting as a child', so would an avatar like this (from the marketplace - no negative intent to the creator intended) not qualify as a child avatar because they have ears and tail? Are they okay being nude, because they're 'not human'? Would it be okay to enter adult areas or do behaviour not allowed in the TOS while wearing these avatars? Again there are specific traits of different age groups that most people would recognize and agree, it's not that bewildering to the general populace. I posted this earlier with convo with Jaylin: How your avatar 'presents' and most importantly what one would be doing with it, would be a deciding factor if something untoward is going on. Yes 'child' can define the age group you speak of, but in general 'child' means a specific age group, and pointedly (not maturely developed) vs a teen who may or may not be maturely developed (and then the law steps in about consent and all that). Of course there are those on SL who will say to the judge "Well technically, your honor, it's not a knife, it was a spoon, so how can I stab someone with a spoon" and play dumb of any wrongdoing, skirting the rules, or outright breaking them In case you missed it... 6 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said: So is that teen 18 ,19 or 14? The first 2 are adult and the 3rd one is not. A lot of women (adult avatars) present as slim and petite. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayashe Ninetails Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 3 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said: I think the distraction there is: Any talk about non-human avatars is NOT relevant. Disagree. There are child/teen fantasy avatars, as well. Mermaids, centaurs, possibly fae/elves off the top of my head. Akeruka has a baby/child cyclops head, too (Flickr link here). I would assume they've also got to follow the new modesty layer rules, so whether or not we'll see fantasy skins that adhere to the rules would be of some concern to them. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 Just now, Rowan Amore said: In case you missed it... Apparently, hair style plays a big role. I fear that "ponytails" will be a consideration with "who's a child / teen avatar" under the new TOS. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madelaine McMasters Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 22 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said: club owners may still ban based on height, but what can ya do. 4 2 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 Just now, Ayashe Ninetails said: 11 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said: I think the distraction there is: Any talk about non-human avatars is NOT relevant. Disagree. There are child/teen fantasy avatars, as well. Mermaids, centaurs, possibly fae/elves off the top of my head. Akeruka has a baby/child cyclops head, too (Flickr link here). I would assume they've also got to follow the new modesty layer rules, so whether or not we'll see fantasy skins that adhere to the rules would be of some concern to them. Thank you. I am glad we are not focusing on the animal avatars too much. Literally, it would be silly if my "Kid Lion" avatar, being all primmy etc. had to wear modesty layers. But such is life. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flower Caerndow Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 49 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said: What are suspect bodies/skins and why would they need to be banned? Because someone likes to make up imaginary scenarios to keep the thread going and their post count up 3 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 minute ago, Madelaine McMasters said: The Debil, she be childish always! At least, your entire avatar is a "modesty layer" - well, technically not if it is all one texture per the TOS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalificent Corvinus Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 12 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said: I think the distraction there is: Any talk about non-human avatars is NOT relevant. At the same time, I recall someone saying, "what if they took away furries?". So, there's that. Wrong. Admins on Adult rated parcels/regions have been up against this for years., the place as a strict no child avi rule, but the AR Clickbait come in and "I am not a child avatar I am a..." and then you face 5 or 10 mins of pathetic excuses, mostly based on "ears/tail/paws therefore anti-***-play section of ToS doesn't apply to me, Exempt!". And then we kick and ban them anyway because EVERY excuse they gave is fraudulent. 1 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayashe Ninetails Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said: Thank you. I am glad we are not focusing on the animal avatars too much. Literally, it would be silly if my "Kid Lion" avatar, being all primmy etc. had to wear modesty layers. But such is life. That may also be relevant. Despite wearing a few furries, I'm not really in the furry community, so I don't know how furry cubs are typically made (in terms of what mesh bodies/skins they use). We'd need LL to clarify whether or not they're included. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 50 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said: 1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said: Now here's an idea for the "legalists": Ban suspect bodies / skins etc., only for users in countries where those items may be illegal under the laws in that country. Silly, huh? I don't want to touch the legal arguments with a ten-foot pole (though Flower does provide interesting context as to why that matters in the US, too), but I don't understand what this means. What are suspect bodies/skins and why would they need to be banned? Sorry - I almost missed your reply question until someone else replied to it. The answer is: My idea was for the "legalists". I do not myself support it or have an opinion on it, but since some are discussing legal terms, I was suggesting that perhaps it is something specific they could discuss instead of the generic "obscenity" definitions, etc. Who knows, their contribution with specific information could be on-topic for the TOS changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leslie Trihey Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Madi Melodious said: We do. We are a very large part of the economy in SL. My costs to the lab a year are close to $1500 directly, account and sim costs. I know one child AV that has close to a dozen sims, yo can do that math. If we were not a large part of the Labs income, I doubt we would still be here. Yeah I don't think some people understand just how many sims and how much land smol AV's own, not to mention all the associated family RP sims and land. A certain user's "Minority of walking AR violations" or whatever she calls them would cost LL a huge chunk of money to lose. Edited May 8 by Leslie Trihey 6 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madi Melodious Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 hour ago, ErwinVonVlotho said: Somehow I don't think SL are too worried about nude pics of Girl Next Door. Akk! Kill it with fire! I disagree. I do believe they are worried about just pics of the "Girl Next Door" getting out. But not for the reasons people are bringing up. 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 3 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said: That may also be relevant. Despite wearing a few furries, I'm not really in the furry community, so I don't know how furry cubs are typically made (in terms of what mesh bodies/skins they use). We'd need LL to clarify whether or not they're included. This is why - MUCH earlier in the thread - I touched on ferals vs. anthros vs. Nekos. I ASSUME that Nekos are most likely to be impacted, being the most human. (Even if it turned out that according to "some definitions", the others are "doing bad stuff" too.) The reason I dropped the topic (although it came up just now yay), is I assumed - possibly wrongly - that Furries are outside of the discussion and possibly not even a consideration of the TOS changes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Sharkfin Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 3 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said: We'd need LL to clarify whether or not they're included. This is a good point! Of course it's tricky since there is no age of consent for animals? 🤔 Nor is there any age at which ***** is considered legal... So I guess it may just be safest for LL to ban neko/furry sex entirely?! 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said: So I guess it may just be safest for LL to ban neko/furry sex entirely?! I know you were being facetious but.. If Nekos / Furries end up exactly as "wholesome" as Tinies and Dinkies (but hopefully a lot less creepy), that is fine with me! In fact: I would vote for applying the TOS equally to ALL avatar "species". HAH! Edited May 8 by Love Zhaoying 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codex Alpha Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 16 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said: Apparently, hair style plays a big role. I fear that "ponytails" will be a consideration with "who's a child / teen avatar" under the new TOS. Considered in the overall 'presentation', of course.. As would a teddy bear being carried, lollipop in mouth, piggie tails, that are articles of childhood, not adulthood. It's not rocket science lol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffee Pancake Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 5 minutes ago, Leslie Trihey said: Yeah I don't think some people understand just how many sims and how much land smol AV's own, not to mention all the associated family RP sims and land. A certain user's "Minority of walking AR violations" or whatever she calls them would cost LL a huge chunk of money to lose. This is because they have had to make and pay for all their own spaces since the start of SL. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Sharkfin Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said: I know you were being facetious but.. If Nekos / Furries end up exactly as "wholesome" as Tinies and Dinkies (but hopefully a lot less creepy), that is fine with me! In fact: I would vote for applying the TOS equally to ALL avatar "species". HAH! I'm glad you got the point and didn't take my comment completely seriously. And in response to something you said in this thread a lot of pages back, if LL did try something similar to this with the furry community I'd be in that thread saying exactly the same thing and bringing up exactly the same objections too, because no matter what niche group is under fire they're still a part of the SL community as a whole, our community! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starberry Passion Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said: Considered in the overall 'presentation', of course.. As would a teddy bear being carried, lollipop in mouth, piggie tails, that are articles of childhood, not adulthood. It's not rocket science lol Many adults wear pigtails and many adults enjoy suckers many adults also enjoy teddy bears still. Edited May 8 by Starberry Passion 4 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madi Melodious Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 36 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said: I'm trying to get some to come to the governance meeting tomorrow - The responses so far can neatly be summed up as I'm going to be there. Several of us from the cute little AV community are going to come. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codex Alpha Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 Just now, Starberry Passion said: Many adults wear pigtails and many adults enjoy suckers True, but the entire 'presentation' would be considered, as well as what the user is doing with the avatar. Noone saying that piggie tails on a gray-haired wrinkled old lady makes her a child. Seriously people gotta stop playing dumb, or at least stop panicing. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 2 minutes ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said: I'm glad you got the point and didn't take my comment completely seriously. And in response to something you said in this thread a lot of pages back, if LL did try something similar to this with the furry community I'd be in that thread saying exactly the same thing and bringing up exactly the same objections too, because no matter what niche group is under fire they're still a part of the SL community as a whole, our community! I think one difference is, with Furries it will be a different set of "subjective rules" to determine "what's a child avatar". Since so many Furries are "cute", that can't be it. Since so many Furries are "short", that can't be it. Oh geeze, I hate to do this: I guess we need TOS clarification for Furries. 😞 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffee Pancake Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 2 minutes ago, Madi Melodious said: I'm going to be there. Several of us from the cute little AV community are going to come. we need as many as possible, there are going to be a lot of questions and concerns, plenty we wont have thought of. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starberry Passion Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 minute ago, Starberry Passion said: Many adults wear pigtails and many adults enjoy suckers many adults also enjoy teddy bears still. 1 minute ago, Codex Alpha said: True, but the entire 'presentation' would be considered, as well as what the user is doing with the avatar. Noone saying that piggie tails on a gray-haired wrinkled old lady makes her a child. Seriously people gotta stop playing dumb, or at least stop panicing. How is anything I just said a panic or playing dumb? Not following. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 minute ago, Coffee Pancake said: we need as many as possible, there are going to be a lot of questions and concerns, plenty we wont have thought of. Where is it and time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts