Modesty Patch Discussion

[Coffee Pancake]

Just now, Kaia Sachin said:

I'm going to be wearing modesty layers from now on just to be on the safe side. 

Then you will be self identifying your avatar as representing a child.

I would strongly recommend that you not do this unless you plan on following all the other rules and effectively being a full child avatar.

[Kaia Sachin]

Since I'm unwilling to change my appearance, I'll be complying with everything else that's outlined in the new TOS as well. Thanks for pointing that out!

[Madi Melodious]

I like how some of you are just blowing this off like it's not a big deal.   I can most certainly guarantee you that this is a big deal to some people.   The person that came to me never had a chance to express their selves.  They said they were in tears because this is the happiest they have ever been.   Now they have no certainty what they are going to do.   They said it was like they are lost all over.

There will not be a simple answer to this one.

 

[LittleMe Jewell]

3 minutes ago, Madi Melodious said:

I like how some of you are just blowing this off like it's not a big deal.   I can most certainly guarantee you that this is a big deal to some people.   The person that came to me never had a chance to express their selves.  They said they were in tears because this is the happiest they have ever been.   Now they have no certainty what they are going to do.   They said it was like they are lost all over.

There will not be a simple answer to this one.

 

I'm still not seeing the issue.  If someone is presenting as a female, they need the top modesty layer.  If they are presenting as male, they do not.  Trans children still usually present as one or the other -- though neither is an option, but as far as the modesty layer goes, they would not need the top/breast panel.

Edited May 8 by LittleMe Jewell

[brodiac90]

You do raise some good points about older children. I'm not sure the back part is needed but I also can't see LL changing their mind. For the most part the examples of the modesty layers LL supplied are a lot better than I thought they were going to be.  I think at some point you just kind of have to go.... this is as good as it's going to get and if you push any harder they might just say sod it. 

[Ceka Cianci]

5 minutes ago, Madi Melodious said:

I like how some of you are just blowing this off like it's not a big deal.   I can most certainly guarantee you that this is a big deal to some people.   The person that came to me never had a chance to express their selves.  They said they were in tears because this is the happiest they have ever been.   Now they have no certainty what they are going to do.   They said it was like they are lost all over.

There will not be a simple answer to this one.

 

All I was doing was showing a way that it can be done, with not much effort in the changing process..

 

Edited May 8 by Ceka Cianci

[LittleMe Jewell]

1 minute ago, brodiac90 said:

You do raise some good points about older children. I'm not sure the back part is needed but I also can't see LL changing their mind. For the most part the examples of the modesty layers LL supplied are a lot better than I thought they were going to be.  I think at some point you just kind of have to go.... this is as good as it's going to get and if you push any harder they might just say sod it. 

I probably wouldn't push on the issue, but I would still bring it up.

[Persephone Emerald]

29 minutes ago, Madi Melodious said:

I like how some of you are just blowing this off like it's not a big deal.   I can most certainly guarantee you that this is a big deal to some people.   The person that came to me never had a chance to express their selves.  They said they were in tears because this is the happiest they have ever been.   Now they have no certainty what they are going to do.   They said it was like they are lost all over.

There will not be a simple answer to this one.

 

People often are like that. If it doesn't affect us, it's not our problem.

I tend to try to see a situation from different perspectives, so I care about people who want to use a child avatar for perfectly innocent reasons - as long as they aren't annoying me with baby talk or sketchy behavior. How a Linden Lab policy could affect me is the most important to me, but how it affects others could affect me too - if too many child avatars leave the grid. Linden Lab cares about retaining users though. They aren't going to do anything at this point that would seriously hurt their customer base.

Edited May 8 by Persephone Emerald
typo

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

Just because the examples of modesty layers that LL provided look "ugly" doesn't necessarily mean that the modesty layers added to skins has to follow the same trend.

Adding modesty layers to skins really is as simple as overlaying an existing underwear texture over a skin texture, it's hardly a monumental task.  If skin creators wish to do so, they can probably provide skins with a variety of opaque, non-skin-toned underwear/modesty layers on which could be worn with various outfits.

Admittedly it's not as ideal as simply being able to wear any item of clothing you like, and it is going to restrict what people can wear but that doesn't necessarily mean they all have to wear full length bathing suits, etc to completely cover the modesty patches.

Edited May 8 by Fluffy Sharkfin
typo

[Arielle Popstar]

4 hours ago, Madi Melodious said:

Now that we have the modesty patch examples from the Lab.  I was just approached with a question about it.  What will be the Lab's policy on transgender issue and how the modesty patches are applied?  

I was out for a few hours, where can I find the modesty patch examples?

[brodiac90]

3 minutes ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

Just because the examples of modesty layers that LL provided look "ugly" doesn't necessarily mean that the modesty layers added to clothing has to follow the same trend.

Adding modesty layers to skins really is as simple as overlaying an existing underwear texture over a skin texture, it's hardly a monumental task.  If skin creators wish to do so, they can probably provide skins with a variety of opaque, non-skin-toned underwear/modesty layers on which could be worn with various outfits.

Admittedly it's not as ideal as simply being able to wear any item of clothing you like, and it is going to restrict what people can wear but that doesn't necessarily mean they all have to wear full length bathing suits, etc to completely cover the modesty patches.

indeed, I would like to see creators make HUDs for modestly layers like any other form of clothing so we can have lots of designs and colours. As long as TOS is followed that should be possible.  

[Madi Melodious]

6 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

People often are like that. If it doesn't affect us, it's not our problem.

Thank you for that.  I will admit I've not kept up with the trans community; until a few days ago I didn't even know there was a trans kid's community in SL.  They come to me and was hurting.  That is what mattered to me. 

[Codex Alpha]

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I was out for a few hours, where can I find the modesty patch examples?

 

https://lindenlab.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/31000173097-child-avatar-faq/

Note: I did embellish image from source for amusements

 

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

Just now, brodiac90 said:

indeed, I would like to see creators make HUDs for modestly layers like any other form of clothing so we can have lots of designs and colours. As long as TOS is followed that should be possible.  

Well it would have to be a HUD that changed between skin textures (all of which can have various "styles" of TOS compliant modesty layers) but yes that was what I was getting at.  

[brodiac90]

2 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I was out for a few hours, where can I find the modesty patch examples?

These are the examples. 

 

[Madi Melodious]

Just now, brodiac90 said:

indeed, I would like to see creators make HUDs for modestly layers like any other form of clothing so we can have lots of designs and colours. As long as TOS is followed that should be possible.  

I'm not sure this would be possible.  Modestly layers can't be removed.

[Arwyn Quandry]

I don't see any reason the back strap on the 'female' top half would be necessary for modesty. You could probably end it underneath of the arms and it would still cover everything it needs to cover.

[brodiac90]

3 minutes ago, Madi Melodious said:

I'm not sure this would be possible.  Modestly layers can't be removed.

LL didn't really address that with the latest FAQ so now I think it's more you can't remove it or else you're breaking TOS. If that weren't the case I would expect them to address it since large portion of the thread was dedicated to that topic. 

Edited May 8 by brodiac90

[Theresa Tennyson]

1 hour ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

They could have easily gotten by with the female top panel just covering the breasts, without the side and back strap.  

I don't have any avatars that play teens, but I still think that they shouldn't have to suffer, clothing wise, because LL wants them to dress the same as younger child avatars.

Yes, I know SL is not RL -- and I have said that myself -- but still..............

As far as I can see, the idea of "modesty panels" is strictly for body skin makers with products specifically for children, not "these specific areas have to be covered on all underage avatars. Here's what I wrote in a related thread:

Now we're seeing the reason for specific wording in the policy. The policy says that modesty panels are required to be provided by creators in products made [specifically] for children.

For the end user, Child avatars can never be nude. Doesn't say boo about modesty panels.

So, if an older child is using a body intended for adults, they'll need to cover up things their ownself.

If someone sells a skin by calling it, "Super Sweet 16 Dewy Teen Skin," yes, it needs to have underwear. But nothing in the policy says the dewy 16 year old has to wear a skin with that description. Underwear? Absolutely.

A lot of my avatars are characters that have looks ranging from child to adult. A lot of them use the same Pink Fuel or Izzie's skins for all those ages, with different body development handled by tatoo layers. As far as I can tell, as long as they wear underwear when anyone can see them they can keep using the same skins.

[Arielle Popstar]

3 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

 

https://lindenlab.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/31000173097-child-avatar-faq/

Note: I did embellish image from source for amusements

 

Well thank you though I missed what was amusing. That happens when some are flaunting their obvious bias.

[Madi Melodious]

1 minute ago, brodiac90 said:

These are the examples. 

 

They are not hideous.  Not like I was expecting.  The top one breaks a few swimsuits of mine but not the main one.   I'm sure with time creators will come out with better ones. 

[Persephone Emerald]

20 minutes ago, brodiac90 said:

You do raise some good points about older children. I'm not sure the back part is needed but I also can't see LL changing their mind. For the most part the examples of the modesty layers LL supplied are a lot better than I thought they were going to be.  I think at some point you just kind of have to go.... this is as good as it's going to get and if you push any harder they might just say sod it. 

I'm just gonna point out that as a boy avatar, this is good for you. Female avatars, on the other hand, especially those playing teens and older, like to buy clothing. And clothing creators make most of their money selling to female avatars, rather than to male ones. Limiting what people can buy, is going to affect the SL economy, even if only by a little.

[brodiac90]

3 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

I'm just gonna point out that as a boy avatar, this is good for you. Female avatars, on the other hand, especially those playing teens and older, like to buy clothing. And clothing creators make most of their money selling to female avatars, rather than to male ones. Limiting what people can buy, is going to affect the SL economy, even if only by a little.

I must be a girl at heart then because my favourite activity is shopping and I have so many outfits it is unbelievable. I already said I agree the back part is uncessary, but I also stated I don't think LL are going to change their minds. Yes it's rubbish, and no, the kid communuity in general being deminished is not good for me. 

Edited May 8 by brodiac90

[Rowan Amore]

10 minutes ago, Arwyn Quandry said:

I don't see any reason the back strap on the 'female' top half would be necessary for modesty. You could probably end it underneath of the arms and it would still cover everything it needs to cover.

That was my thought, too.  

[Love Zhaoying]

42 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Yes

Yay!