Nika Talaj Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 (edited) I think LL's use of the term "modesty layer" in their official Clarification is confusing, particularly since Maitreya and other body makers provide mesh bits called "layers" for tattoos, underwear, etc.. These are basically onion layers for things that you want to wear under your mesh clothes. I don't think that's what LL is referring to - I think they mean that skins for child avatars must APPEAR to be wearing an underwear layer, but it must be baked into the skin itself. Edited May 2 by Nika Talaj 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanity Fair Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 (edited) 2 hours ago, AmeliaJ08 said: Some will definitely treat it as one. 100%! It’s inevitable. I predict we’re gonna see some epic in-world protests. Edited May 3 by Vanity Fair 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starberry Passion Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 2 minutes ago, Nika Talaj said: I think LL's use of the term "modesty layer" in their official Clarification is confusing, particularly since Maitreya and other body makers provide mesh bits called "layers" for tattoos, underwear, etc.. These are basically onion layers for things that you want to wear under your mesh clothes. I don't think that's what LL is referring to - I think they mean that skins must APPEAR to be wearing an underwear layer, but it must be baked into the skin itself. If you ever played Black Desert Online, when you create a character you can't see them naked but they are wearing bras and panties baked into the mesh, with the skin. I think they mean in that way, where you have the skin and you have the underwear covering up private areas so you cannot see them naked, it's just caked into the Bom 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 8 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said: Try it again and see what happens. I've just switched mine to GM to take those screenshots and back to GMA with no difficulty. Ok a current release of Firestorm did block access to an Adult region when I reset my maturity rating. Must have fixed it Will wonders cease? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanity Fair Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 1 hour ago, Fraser Lisle said: To complicate matters further: Rebirth Body. Is it child or adult? It certainly markets itself as a universal body and the difference is a click of a switch in the HUD. Note that content is shared between the modes and the actual switch merely changes the chest 'mode' from flat to petite to larger breasts. It is not labeled as "child" and "adult" as far as I know yet marketing imagery would suggest this is the intention... yet an adult can of course be small or flat breasted. This is the kind of thing this policy does nothing to clarify and only endagers users who may not have the same perception or intent as any other user or administrator. Yes, I was thinking about this creator, although I couldn’t remember the store name. It is (or at least, it used to be) a mesh body that you could adjust to pretty much any gender or age. i wonder how Rebirth is going to respond to these changes? I’m glad I don’t run such a business! I’d be tearing my hair out. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilbap Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 So, this count as modesty layer? Because that's kinda what I am operating on with this lack of clear information. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleMe Jewell Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 6 minutes ago, Nika Talaj said: I think LL's use of the term "modesty layer" in their official Clarification is confusing, particularly since Maitreya and other body makers provide mesh bits called "layers" for tattoos, underwear, etc.. These are basically onion layers for things that you want to wear under your mesh clothes. I don't think that's what LL is referring to - I think they mean that skins for child avatars must APPEAR to be wearing an underwear layer, but it must be baked into the skin itself. IIRC, there are a few child avatar bodies that come with the skin(s) baked onto the body and there are not options of third party skins. That might be why the rules mention "child avatar skins or bodies". 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cristiano Midnight Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 8 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said: But, what child avatar wants to take the chance.? If some meanie runs around de-rendering clothing on child avatars to see if they are in "modesty" compliance and AR's any that are not - that is not a risk many would want to take. I did forget about people creepy enough to derender and then report. However, an alpha layer underneath would protect against that too. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleMe Jewell Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 1 minute ago, Lilbap said: So, this count as modesty layer? Because that's kinda what I am operating on with this lack of clear information. Does the butt have to have any covering? I was thinking just breast and front genital area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffee Pancake Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 12 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said: Toddlers also have parents that watch them and not hundreds of people wanting to sexualize them Toddler avatars (and some bigs kids) use RLVa based control attachments, so could be force teleported into adult regions. We will be looking at adding some protections for this, but it could be some time before it's live in everyone's TPV of choice. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilbap Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 1 minute ago, LittleMe Jewell said: Does the butt have to have any covering? I was thinking just breast and front genital area. How would I know? There's no details yet... no examples.. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathlen Onyx Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 1 minute ago, LittleMe Jewell said: Does the butt have to have any covering? I was thinking just breast and front genital area. Again, a picture would clear up a lot of confusion. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissSweetViolet Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said: Actually .. this has just been brought to my attention, Maitreya (and other adult bodies) have geometry based sexual characteristics. Making a child avatar with that body isn't possible as the body itself violates the rules. Does this mean that anyone wearing Maitreya could not be considered an child avatar and is therefore .. safe ? This is actually a great question, I would like LL to answer, how do they police this? Especially since those who skirt the line are the ones who engage in inappropriate behavior the most. 28 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said: To you and me, NO. To LL, it sounds like it does matter. They seem to want to completely remove the ability for a child avatar to ever show nipples/genitals. That seems to be the critical part. However, that critical part will still only ever apply to avatars that are using an obvious child avatar, rather than someone that is simply a 15-17 yr old teen. Yes, how do they handle that iffy age range? I would like to know too. 29 minutes ago, Lilbap said: Hi first post, nice to meet you all even if this is a horrible time to be a kid in SL. So, if the Lindens are here listening, please SHOW us what a "modesty layer" is upposed to look like? I mean, I just put black censor bars over my bits baked onto the skin I have. Is that a modesty layer? How about solid examples as opposed to just vague requests. 100% This! ^ 15 minutes ago, Nika Talaj said: I think LL's use of the term "modesty layer" in their official Clarification is confusing, particularly since Maitreya and other body makers provide mesh bits called "layers" for tattoos, underwear, etc.. These are basically onion layers for things that you want to wear under your mesh clothes. I don't think that's what LL is referring to - I think they mean that skins for child avatars must APPEAR to be wearing an underwear layer, but it must be baked into the skin itself. My understanding based off reading, is it's on the body creator, not the skin creator, since they mention child avatar makers and state it can not be removed, no idea how that'll be implemented yet. Edited May 2 by MissSweetViolet Spelling corrections. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starberry Passion Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 I assumed this is what they mean by modesty coverage no indication of sexual parts and unable to remove it from the body. 7 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BilliJo Aldrin Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 1 hour ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: Personally, I agree. But then I think adult women should be allowed to be topless in public (which, where I live, they are, actually). yea, here in the states we are allowed to bear arms, but up in the GWN you are allowed to bare breasts 3 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innula Zenovka Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 3 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said: Toddler avatars (and some bigs kids) use RLVa based control attachments, so could be force teleported into adult regions. We will be looking at adding some protections for this, but it could be some time before it's live in everyone's TPV of choice. Does an RLV forced teleport override the Maturity Ratings settings in the teleportee's preferences? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starberry Passion Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 1 minute ago, BilliJo Aldrin said: yea, here in the states we are allowed to bear arms, but up in the GWN you are allowed to bare breasts You would think, giving how others see us, would be the land where "You have the right to bear arms, you have the right to bare breats, you have the right for freedom and democracy!" but we no, just guns and cheeseburgers. lol 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffee Pancake Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 1 minute ago, Starberry Passion said: I assumed this is what they mean by modesty coverage no indication of sexual parts and unable to remove it from the body. This breaks a considerable amount of clothing, not least of all swim suits. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nika Talaj Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 9 minutes ago, Lilbap said: So, this count as modesty layer? Because that's kinda what I am operating on with this lack of clear information. To my eyes, that calls attention to the genitals, whereas my bet is that LL is thinking more along the lines of tidy whities, ala Starberry's post above. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffee Pancake Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 2 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said: Does an RLV forced teleport override the Maturity Ratings settings in the teleportee's preferences? Setting the limit in teleport preferences is not seen as a suitable safety alone. There are times when an the owner of an account that is typically a child will need to enter an adult region ( not least of all shopping). This means that setting will end up toggled back and forth as need dictates. Constant setting and resetting that option is how accidents happen. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayashe Ninetails Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 As far as modesty layers go, I imagine it'd need full coverage. So, 2-piece swimwear, 1-piece swimsuit/bodysuit, bra/undies, tank top/shorts, boxers, bandeaus, camis, tube tops - any of that would likely be alright. Finding good solutions that fit under third-party swimwear might be a bit of a challenge. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilbap Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 I guess the censor bar across my chest telling them to go die in a fire isn't going to fly either.. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 What sucks is the whole focus is on removing temptation to child/teen/tween avatars rather then focusing on those who are sexually attracted to them, which is where the real problem lies. 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissSweetViolet Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 1 minute ago, Coffee Pancake said: Setting the limit in teleport preferences is not seen as a suitable safety alone. There are times when an the owner of an account that is typically a child will need to enter an adult region ( not least of all shopping). This means that setting will end up toggled back and forth as need dictates. Constant setting and resetting that option is how accidents happen. I'm assuming any stores that have child stuff will need to relocate. But you make a great point, because many accounts also use more then one avatar. I go between several including LaraX, TD Kid, TWI Wolf, Dinkie Kitty, just to name a few, so that's a ton of toggling. I do wonder if HUDs like Starries will implement something for this though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmeliaJ08 Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 Well I think we can safely say after 19 pages that the rules might need a little clarification As far as the people using child avi's go you have my sympathies, I can't shake the feeling people who are completely blameless are going to be inconvenienced, hurt and endangered by all of this and have absolutely nothing to do with what spurred this policy change. 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts