So what changed in the Terms of Service?

[Arielle Popstar]

2 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

When I ban a child avatar from my clubhouse on Zindra, can i set them on fire first?

The idea behind all this is supposedly for the protection of children, not to worsen their lot.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

7 minutes ago, Starberry Passion said:

It's a bom training bra, she can put something over that. I am failing to see anything sexual about a training bra, I don't understand. They can wear that under their clothing.

I do take your point. Personally (and there are those here who will disagree with this), I'm tired of the sexualization of adult breasts too.

But we do live in a culture in which breasts are sexualized. And a training bra is very likely to be perceived as a sexualization of young girls, if only merely because it suggests that they are developing breasts.

Now, if this were tagged as for "teens" rather than "child," there might not be the same issue?

Understand, though, that I'm not speaking from a personal moral perspective here. I'm thinking about 1) how LL might perceive such items, and 2) how they are possibly likely to be perceived by those who do engage in a*eplay.

[AmeliaJ08]

2 minutes ago, Starberry Passion said:

It's not a purge.

Some will definitely treat it as one.

[Chaser Zaks]

6 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

I don't see anything wrong with these pictures. What is the problem you see here?

I don't either.

First one I could say that Children like to play dress up. Maid outfits themselves aren't inheritly sexual, although due to the lack of maids wearing such outfits these days and most common depiction people will see them is in a erotic sense, they are often associated with sexuality. However you see young characters dressed in Anime wearing maid outfits in a SFW manner often enough to not say it's uncommon.

Second one I would say would make a great "Modesty" layer.

Edited May 2 by Chaser Zaks

[Scylla Rhiadra]

6 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

When I ban a child avatar from my clubhouse on Zindra, can i set them on fire first?

Maddy?????

[Persephone Emerald]

26 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

so now if a child comes into my clubhouse on Zindra i can ban them AND AR them?

*rubbing my hands in glee*

Eject and Ban should be sufficient. Why give more work to Goverance if the avatars weren't actually doing anything bad?

[Arielle Popstar]

6 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

When I ban a child avatar from my clubhouse on Zindra, can i set them on fire first?

If that was a joke, it kinda fell flat.

[LittleMe Jewell]

1 minute ago, Starberry Passion said:

I don't see the wrong in either of them. It's a bom training bra, she can wear tops over it.

The child avatar can wear the training bra without a top over it.  The training bra is not showing the breasts nor emphasizing the breasts/nipples, thus no violation of the rules -- at least IMO.

[BilliJo Aldrin]

5 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said:

it's quite obvious that you don't like child avatars but that's not the topic here. 

What I meant was could I be ARed for child abuse?

[Scylla Rhiadra]

2 minutes ago, SynergyOne said:

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

—Martin Niemöller

Well, this is very dramatic!

Do you really think that rules restricting some aspects of kiddie RP and representation is quite in the same category as warnings about the rise of fascism, though?

[Chaser Zaks]

1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Well, this is very dramatic!

Do you really think that rules restricting some aspects of kiddie RP and representation is quite in the same category as warnings about the rise of fascism, though?

I think it is a, be it poor taste, way of trying to say "Slippery slope". The problem is this isn't a slope and it isn't slippery, it is just LL clarifying the rules.

[LittleMe Jewell]

2 hours ago, Starberry Passion said:

I think child avatars marketed as child avatars should be what is a child avatar and adult market avatars should only be adult and should only be adults, you shouldn't be allowed to label them as child or use them as a Child.

Bodies like:

Maitreya

Lara X

Petite X

Legacy

Legacy Perky 

Reborn

Kupra

Peach

Gen X

and any other body that is marketed towards adults and have an adult appearance shouldn't be labeled as child.

Except that I can take my Maitreya body and with some add-ons and shape modification, make a 15-17 yr old teenager.  If I do so, then I should be expected to abide by the child avatar rules and should expect to be banned if I do not.

[steeljane42]

2 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

I don't see anything wrong with these pictures. What is the problem you see here?

Unrelated to the topic at all, but 1st one is just ripped off dress from the (now dead) TERA online. Gotta love the MP filled with that so called "content" for years.

---

As for the new rules - pretty much what I've expected from the previous blog post LL made. Lots of vague stuff, but the change about not allowing children avatars to be around A rated regions was a long overdue. Not going to speculate about what can be considered a child avatar and what can't be, there's already 13 pages of that, but in all my time in SL I've never seen a "legit" children avatars wanting to be around A rated regions in the first place.

By "legit" I mean ones who actually want to relive that experience for one reason or another, do all that family RP stuff and what not. Now those few I've actually seen around A regions filled with adult activities... those I would call nothing, but griefers. Maybe even worst kind of griefers, because old-school particle spam and region crashes are easy to fix, while those little griefers spamming ARs around A rated regions are/were a lot more serious.

[Arielle Popstar]

Just now, Chaser Zaks said:

I think it is a, be it poor taste, way of trying to say "Slippery slope". The problem is this isn't a slope and it isn't slippery, it is just LL clarifying the rules.

Except they really aren't. Just added more layers of complexity is what I see. They could start by showing examples of what they consider child/tween/teen avatars for the sake of Governance action.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Chaser Zaks said:

I think it is a, be it poor taste, way of trying to say "Slippery slope". The problem is this isn't a slope and it isn't slippery, it is just LL clarifying the rules.

It is, to say the least, an overstatement.

And I agree that this isn't really a slippery slope at all; on the contrary, by clarifying the rules, it's a good deal less treacherous to navigate than it once was.

BUT I also understand, and empathize, with those who are upset about this. Unfortunately, we all knew something like this was coming: the consolation is that it could have been much much worse.

[Fraser Lisle]

Yeah the rules seem super clear, that's why there's a multi page discussion on if it's okay to report clothing for Kemono and being cute or wearing underwear if you're using a - completely undefined - child avatar...

[Persephone Emerald]

25 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

. . . on a "child."

It's called a training bra, but it's really just a crop top.

I had the beginning of breasts when I was 12. I had padded tops on my slips and wore training bras. Just as some people look younger than their age, some also start to develop earlier.

[Starberry Passion]

1 minute ago, Madi Melodious said:

From our point of view it is.  There are many child avatars that are very upset  and some are even closing accounts.

I'm sorry... i sympathize with you and Don't know what you're going through but hopefully it'll get better.

I'm not condemning child avatars at all and I understand that people come on second life to live a life they either cannot have had or to cope with something they lost, or to experience something they lost, or if they cannot have children IRL so they want to have a family here.

People do get really deep into protecting fictional beings, but you have to understand that child avatars, even though they are played by adults most of the time, look like little kids. Not always, some look like adults on a toddle doo but the thing is is that it is a community thing as a whole, that doesn't want sexual under-***** so Linden is complying to that and trying to make them happy. 

Some people will say it's illegal, which it would be if the avatar was indistinguishable from an actual child, which could happen and people are worried about that. The closer to an actual child you look the more it is boarding on actual C.P. if someone were to start using it for sexual purposes.

With Avatars and people fixated on making their avatars more realistic, according to them, you can see this happening can't you?

[Love Zhaoying]

9 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

15 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

When I ban a child avatar from my clubhouse on Zindra, can i set them on fire first?

Maddy?????

It's hard to set them on fire AFTER they are banned..

[SynergyOne]

8 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

If that was a joke, it kinda fell flat.

No it was outright inflammatory (no pun intended) and offensive on purpose.

[Katherine Heartsong]

3 hours ago, Denim Robonaught said:

We all know that sims are huge and can have split areas.

Yes, but those parcels (even if individually owned) can not change the overall sim's rating. If you buy a parcel, you're stuck with the highest default maturity rating. That's the reason people pay so much for adult-rated mainland, or rent/buy an entire homestead, sim etc to set their own rating.

Sorry, only thought the thread was 6 not 12 pages, sure someone else has stated this earlier. My bad.

Edited May 2 by Katherine Heartsong

[Fraser Lisle]

5 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Except that I can take my Maitreya body and with some add-ons and shape modification, make a 15-17 yr old teenager.  If I do so, then I should be expected to abide by the child avatar rules and should expect to be banned if I do not.

Would you say it's therefore basically impossible to present successfully (as in free of any risk) as an eighteen year old avi?

Just based on what you have said, I think I agree. There's nothing we can use to define seventeen Vs eighteen so here we have an adult avi that is highly likely to be victim of rules that are not supposed to apply to them.

 

 

Edited May 2 by Fraser Lisle

[Cristiano Midnight]

1 hour ago, Keira Linden said:

Hi Cristiano,  this was addressed in the first blog post.  Specifically "As owner of Linden Lab, I have initiated a thorough investigation, both internally and with external partners, to review whether or not there have been any violations of our company and community policies by employees, contractors, or community members. "  Today's blog post is the result of the conclusion of those investigations.

 

I read the post. Fair enough, but you can surely understand why there is skepticism in thoroughness of said investigation, given the nature of the accused and accusations. I recognize we will not ever really know the outcome or finding, but it does not instill a huge amount of confidence, as that social media post was hardly the first time the accusations surfaced. Even so, I hope that the changes mentioned do impact things for the better moving forward.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Persephone Emerald said:

It's called a training bra, but it's really just a crop top.

I had the beginning of breasts when I was 12. I had padded tops on my slips and wore training bras. Just as some people look younger than their age, some also start to develop earlier.

Yep. Same.

All of this is true. But consider context and use. In what sorts of context would a child avatar need to be wandering around in a training bra, with nothing on top?

And if she is wearing something over it, why does it need to be a "training bra," with light shading to show some signs of developing breasts?

This isn't about what happens to RL children. RL children don't have "baked on" underwear. It's about what will fly, and how it will be perceived here, in SL.

[LittleMe Jewell]

2 hours ago, Cristiano Midnight said:

So they investigated themselves and found no wrong doing. This is my shocked face 😐

We actually do not yet know if either of the internal or external investigations have been completed.

 

ETA: Correction to the above.  In reading LL's blog post more closely:

 

Though the first paragraph mentions multiple investigations and the second paragraph mentions "investigation" (singular).  So, still not fully sure that all internal AND external investigations have been completed.

 

Edited May 2 by LittleMe Jewell