Will The New TOS on Child Avatars Ensnare Short Adults?

[Fionalein]

19 hours ago, VanVox said:

Naked children hanging out around naked adults has always been illegal and against the TOS.

No it hasn't and that is where the problems began. Because most SL nude beaches unlike most RL ones always seem to fail at keeping creeps away.

[Arielle Popstar]

2 hours ago, PekeNL said:

This entire debate on what is a child and what isn't boils down to using... well... common sense.

This entire discussion is nothing more but people trying to find the skirtline of the rules for no other reason but to be pendantic about it. LL litterally said; "We judge it per case." which is all you can really hope for.

So it would be common sense that you should get a warning or ban for presenting as a young furry avatar who goes about saying "Mommy said I am pretty" should be a cause for you getting AR'ed and warned or banned for a*eplay? It would according to some posting in the forums, be sufficient evidence to warrant being reported.

[Love Zhaoying]

6 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

So it would be common sense that you should get a warning or ban for presenting as a young furry avatar who goes about saying "Mommy said I am pretty" should be a cause for you getting AR'ed and warned or banned for a*eplay? It would according to some posting in the forums, be sufficient evidence to warrant being reported.

I don't think any of your statements above make sense to me. 

Here's why:

I don't see how talking about "mommy" is "a-play"; "a-play" as defined by LL in the TOS and discussions about it, is sexual.

If a Furry child avatar is clothed and in a G-rated region, why would it get AR'd?

If a Furry child avatar is clothed and in an M-rated region, why would it get AR'd?

A Furry child avatar, whether clothed or not, should not be allowed in an Adult region.

 

[Sadvhi]

39 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

No it hasn't and that is where the problems began. Because most SL nude beaches unlike most RL ones always seem to fail at keeping creeps away.

I was under the assumption that it is illegal in the USA, where LL is located, for adults to be naked around children and vice versa. Men are arrested for exposing themselves to grown women in the USA, so I did not ever think that it was okay for child avatars to be naked around adults in Second Life. I honestly cannot comprehend why a child avatar would want to be naked and spend time around naked adults in SL and consider this acceptable behavior.

[Arielle Popstar]

18 hours ago, brodiac90 said:

I have never claimed to represent anyone other than avatars other than those ones similiar to my age group. The fact you think I should represent teen avatars when I have no experience of this is somewhat confusing to me. I've used phrases like 'avatars my age,' multiple times.  

When discussing "child" avatars, everything up to the age of 18 is deemed to be included as per the ToS. It should be broken down to toddler, prepubescent, tween and teen in my mind but that is not how others perceive it if they themselves only ever use 18+ avatars.

Quote

 

LL have been very clear though. Keira Linden stated the following: 

You can't get anymore clear cut than that. If you don't look 18 and you're in adult land then you're breaking TOS.

 

Keira was clear as mud. Not surprising considering the lab is going out of its way to be ambiguous. A careful reading of the various policies and FaQ's shows that. 

Quote

 

Let's not be covert or insinuate at all. I don't think underage looking avatars should be in adult land. Let me say it again. I.do.not.think.children.should.be.in.adult.land. It's one of the reason why I never went to adult land even before the changes came in

 

Well thank you for your personal opinion however there have been a few posts here as well as elsewhere explaining why the barring from Adult land is a major inconvenience for some who have presented as a minor appearing avatar that has nothing to do with a*eplay.

Quote

 

No one is talking about borderline cases, we were discussing the existence of nudity beaches despite them now definitely being against TOS.  I've stated in multiple posts across multiple threads that I think LL is mainly cocnerned with prepubscent avatars such as myself, and that borderline cases in adult land aren't their primary concern. That's the truth, LL is terrified of child avatars like me appearing in images and there being a huge scandal / news. I don't imagine they care about avatars who could be 16 or 17 but who also might be 18 or 19. 

 

Yet borderline cases are the biggest majority by a wide margin who will be affected by the new rules. They are the collateral damage if you will and if as you say SL is mainly concerned about prepubescents, they probably should have given a hint of that rather than leaving it as open season on those where age is not so easily determined.

Quote

I get you're frustrated, there is a lot of that going around. Like I've said, no one hates the bad actors more than genuine kid avatars. I'm sure there were teens who were up to no good as well as avatars my age. Let's not tarnish the vast majority with one ugly brush when most people haven't even done anything wrong. 

A prepubescent engaging in slex is revolting but a teen appearing avatar not so much at least in past. So much so that the concern in some minds is how far back into the chat logs will Governance investigate to determine if there had been any history of underage impropriety, especially prior to the changes in the latest ToS.

[Love Zhaoying]

8 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

a teen appearing avatar not so much at least in past.

Sounds like an opinion!

[Arielle Popstar]

32 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I don't think any of your statements above make sense to me. 

Here's why:

I don't see how talking about "mommy" is "a-play"; "a-play" as defined by LL in the TOS and discussions about it, is sexual.

In one of the SL Wiki's linked by another poster, it said that the term "mommy" is an potential indicator of a-play. I question why the term "Daddy" shouldn't also be included but there you have it. It is one of the indicators Governance uses to determine a-play. I don't think it is common sense either which is why I challenged the poster about what he deems to supposedly be common sense.

Quote

 

If a Furry child avatar is clothed and in a G-rated region, why would it get AR'd?

If a Furry child avatar is clothed and in an M-rated region, why would it get AR'd?

A Furry child avatar, whether clothed or not, should not be allowed in an Adult region.

 

I don't know either but AR's can apparently be filed regardless which in some ways is what I have been arguing about since the start but you have only now perked up about the issue when it potentially involves a furry?

[JacksonBollock]

33 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I don't think any of your statements above make sense to me. 

Here's why:

I don't see how talking about "mommy" is "a-play"; "a-play" as defined by LL in the TOS and discussions about it, is sexual.

If a Furry child avatar is clothed and in a G-rated region, why would it get AR'd?

If a Furry child avatar is clothed and in an M-rated region, why would it get AR'd?

A Furry child avatar, whether clothed or not, should not be allowed in an Adult region.

 

50 Ways to leave your Lover in RL - Only 1 needed In Second Life.

• Buy your loved one a cute puppy for Christmas.
• Wait until the puppy is rolled on its back, and they're scratching its tummy.
• Take an adorable picture for the family album.
• Attach the family album to an AR and click send.
• They be gone.

Bingo, you're free as a bird - just make sure you're fully fledged when you visit those Adult Regions!

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

In one of the SL Wiki's linked by another poster, it said that the term "mommy" is an potential indicator of a-play.

Well, if someone is just talking about their "mommy", and someone reports it, then LL will look at the context of the chat. Your assumption, based on what you posted, that merely referring to one's "mommy" is AP, is absurd.

I realize you are trying to read between the lines.  But, you are either mis-reading, or not understanding.

2 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I question why the term "Daddy" shouldn't also be included but there you have it. It is one of the indicators Governance uses to determine a-play. I don't think it is common sense either which is why I challenged the poster about what he deems to supposedly be common sense.

Ok. 

3 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Quote

If a Furry child avatar is clothed and in a G-rated region, why would it get AR'd?

If a Furry child avatar is clothed and in an M-rated region, why would it get AR'd?

A Furry child avatar, whether clothed or not, should not be allowed in an Adult region.

 

Expand  

I don't know either but AR's can apparently be filed regardless which in some ways is what I have been arguing about since the start but you have only now perked up about the issue when it potentially involves a furry?

As you often seem to do, I think you are conflating "getting AR'd" by users, with the possibility that LL / Governance may actually act on it.

Whether AR's get filed or not, has zero impact on whether AR's get "acted upon" in the manner we are discussing.

People can "AR" others just for being on their land. It doesn't mean they will get banned for AP.

People can "AR" others for saying "mommy says I'm cute", if they don't understand what AP is / isn't. It doesn't mean LL / Governance will consider it "AP" in the definition of "AP".

Maybe you are playing "Devil's Advocate" in some argument? It is impossible to tell, sorry.

[Theresa Tennyson]

53 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

So it would be common sense that you should get a warning or ban for presenting as a young furry avatar who goes about saying "Mommy said I am pretty" should be a cause for you getting AR'ed and warned or banned for a*eplay?

No.

"Mommy said I'm pretty so she ***** my ***** and then ***** it with a cucumber?"

Hell yes.

(They're all just asterisks, people - jeez.)

 

[Love Zhaoying]

4 minutes ago, JacksonBollock said:

50 Ways to leave your Lover in RL - Only 1 needed In Second Life.

• Buy your loved one a cute puppy for Christmas.
• Wait until the puppy is rolled on its back, and they're scratching its tummy.
• Take an adorable picture for the family album.
• Attach the family album to an AR and click send.
• They be gone.

Bingo, you're free as a bird - just make sure you're fully fledged when you visit those Adult Regions!

Well, then all those naked cat avatars wandering around Bellisseria - BELLI!! - definitely need something done.

Those cats are walking around with nary a stitch - wearing NOTHING BUT FUR!!11!

And I bet those cats aren't even teenagers.

 

[Love Zhaoying]

2 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

No.

"Mommy said I'm pretty so she ***** my ***** and then ***** it with a cucumber?"

Hell yes.

(They're all just asterisks, people - jeez.)

 

It's better than "Mad Libs"!

"Mommy said I'm pretty so she drove my car and then unlocked it with a cucumber."

 

[JacksonBollock]

3 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Well, then all those naked cat avatars wandering around Bellisseria - BELLI!! - definitely need something done.

Those cats are walking around with nary a stitch - wearing NOTHING BUT FUR!!11!

And I bet those cats aren't even teenagers.

 

Don't get me started with those seductive Poodles strutting around, half naked in their Continental Clips.

Edited May 15 by JacksonBollock

[brodiac90]

10 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

When discussing "child" avatars, everything up to the age of 18 is deemed to be included as per the ToS. It should be broken down to toddler, prepubescent, tween and teen in my mind

Being more specific probably would have offered more clarity, but it would have have made the new policy more complicated and could potentially leave loop holes and things for people to exploit, so I can see why LL want the policy to be as simple as possible. 

11 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Keira was clear as mud. Not surprising considering the lab is going out of its way to be ambiguous. A careful reading of the various policies and FaQ's shows that. 

LL were not clear at all at first but I don't think you can say the same for Tommy and Kiera at the meeting. Not everyone agreed with that they said, but you cannot argue that what they said was pretty clear. 

13 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Well thank you for your personal opinion

It's an opinion that is pretty much universal. Barring a few exceptions, I've not heard anyone disagreeing with the ban on child avatars in adult land. 

14 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

there have been a few posts here as well as elsewhere explaining why the barring from Adult land is a major inconvenience for some who have presented as a minor appearing avatar that has nothing to do with a*eplay.

The whole thing is a major inconveinece to everyone who already followed the rules and never did anything wrong. Perhaps you could explain to me why you want to be in adult land as a teen avatar though? Or if not you specifically, why you think they should be in general? 

 

22 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

A prepubescent engaging in slex is revolting but a teen appearing avatar not so much at least in past.

24 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

So much so that the concern in some minds is how far back into the chat logs will Governance investigate to determine if there had been any history of underage impropriety, especially prior to the changes in the latest ToS.

So what you're saying is, people who may have done things they shouldn't have been doing are now concerned they might face consequences for doing things they shouldn't have been doing. 

[Theresa Tennyson]

Just now, brodiac90 said:

So what you're saying is, people who may have done things they shouldn't have been doing are now concerned they might face consequences for doing things they shouldn't have been doing. 

And blabbing about it - don't forget that one...

[Love Zhaoying]

3 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

4 minutes ago, brodiac90 said:

So what you're saying is, people who may have done things they shouldn't have been doing are now concerned they might face consequences for doing things they shouldn't have been doing. 

And blabbing about it - don't forget that one...

Right, so now they are open to the possibility of being entrapped! Entrapped I tell you!!!

NOBODY go make an Alt and try to trap anyone who is confessing to AP in these threads.  Better not!

 

[Codex Alpha]

1 hour ago, Arielle Popstar said:

So it would be common sense that you should get a warning or ban for presenting as a young furry avatar who goes about saying "Mommy said I am pretty" should be a cause for you getting AR'ed and warned or banned for a*eplay? It would according to some posting in the forums, be sufficient evidence to warrant being reported.

That was me, and NOONE said it would be 'sufficient evidence' to file a report. Most people I assume are not going to file any type of report . I don't think people care that much, and only in the extreme clear cases.

If you read the Child Avatar Policy then you'd understand why "Mommy, can I pweez have sum ceeweeull" + other objective characteristics and behaviours in said avatar will 'present' it as a child avatar - and IF engaged in TOS-breaking behaviour or in Adult areas - THEN LL might need to take action.

Judgement of AR'ing, investigating and banning will fall under the context of "What were you doing at the time?"

There's a lot of IFS, a lot of objective judgements, and discrimination based on a 'whole large picture'. Your fears on edge cases, and specific and singular reasons may be unwarranted. 99.9% of people will not have to worry.

32 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

In one of the SL Wiki's linked by another poster, it said that the term "mommy" is an potential indicator of a-play. 

That was me, and I was quoting the Child Avatar Policy, which says that it uses such behaviour or conversation as PART of series of objective considerations to determine if you are 'presenting' as a child avatar or not.

Please read this over and over if you need to. First and foremost:

Note: Merely having a childlike avatar does not violate this policy. It is not our intent to banish childlike avatars in and of themselves.

Objective factors which will be used to decide

include

whether an avatar has childlike facial features,

is child-sized,

has clothing or accessories generally associated with children,

and whether, based on the circumstances, an avatar is speaking or acting like a child ("My Mommy says...").

 

I think the 'ambiguity' you speak of, might actually be the factor that protects most people. LL doesn't have time for edge cases, the law doesn't care about 'edge cases' and subjective judgements... so I'm sure that a longer list of characteristics will be used.

 

Edited May 15 by Codex Alpha

[Love Zhaoying]

15 minutes ago, JacksonBollock said:

Don't get me started with those seductive Poodles strutting around, half naked in their Continental Clips.

When the dog "winks at you with his 'brown eye'..", means it needs to poop!  Is not sexual!!!

 

[Codex Alpha]

30 minutes ago, JacksonBollock said:

50 Ways to leave your Lover in RL - Only 1 needed In Second Life.

• Buy your loved one a cute puppy for Christmas.
• Wait until the puppy is rolled on its back, and they're scratching its tummy.
• Take an adorable picture for the family album.
• Attach the family album to an AR and click send.
• They be gone.

Bingo, you're free as a bird - just make sure you're fully fledged when you visit those Adult Regions!

LOL. No.

[JacksonBollock]

33 minutes ago, JacksonBollock said:

50 Ways to leave your Lover in RL - Only 1 needed In Second Life.

• Buy your loved one a cute puppy for Christmas.
• Wait until the puppy is rolled on its back, and they're scratching its tummy.
• Take an adorable picture for the family album.
• Attach the family album to an AR and click send.
• They be gone.

Bingo, you're free as a bird - just make sure you're fully fledged when you visit those Adult Regions!

 

2 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

LOL. No.

That's disappointing, you mean I'm going to have to come up with a plan B?

[JacksonBollock]

9 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

When the dog "winks at you with his 'brown eye'..", means it needs to poop!  Is not sexual!!!

 

Potato, Potatoe.

[Arielle Popstar]

4 minutes ago, brodiac90 said:

Being more specific probably would have offered more clarity, but it would have have made the new policy more complicated and could potentially leave loop holes and things for people to exploit, so I can see why LL want the policy to be as simple as possible. 

LL were not clear at all at first but I don't think you can say the same for Tommy and Kiera at the meeting. Not everyone agreed with that they said, but you cannot argue that what they said was pretty clear. 

The Governance meeting really did not offer any more clarity to what had already been said. Its only good point was the Lab considering to relook at some aspects of the modesty panel.

Quote

It's an opinion that is pretty much universal. Barring a few exceptions, I've not heard anyone disagreeing with the ban on child avatars in adult land. 

Its an opinion that has been universal only on the SL moderated forums where the smart ones don't blab or may make waves that might implicate them. There has been posts however that expressed displeasure about the Adult land prohibition even from some of the prepubescent avatars who had family areas on Adult land. Maybe you didn't see them and I would have too hard a time to find and link them but they have been posted.

Quote

The whole thing is a major inconvenience to everyone who already followed the rules and never did anything wrong. Perhaps you could explain to me why you want to be in adult land as a teen avatar though? Or if not you specifically, why you think they should be in general? 

I've never identified as a minor but some of the outfits and looks I have could be seen as possibly being of someone arguably under 18. You probably don't wish to significantly change your 9 year old look as much as I don't wish to transitioning to a 25 year old look. However most of the activities I prefer, happen on Adult rated land.

Quote

 

So what you're saying is, people who may have done things they shouldn't have been doing are now concerned they might face consequences for doing things they shouldn't have been doing. 

 

Some people who don't use slex as part of the attraction to SL, probably have a hard time understanding those who do and the sorts of activities that have been smiled and winked at by SL over the years. To suddenly do a 180 begs the question for some as to what investigations will entail and how far back they go. This should be obvious for any ToS change that flipped the policy that had been followed to one completely different. That make sense?

[JacksonBollock]

37 minutes ago, brodiac90 said:

So what you're saying is, people who may have done things they shouldn't have been doing are now concerned they might face consequences for doing things they shouldn't have been doing. 

I mean you'd think there'd be a Statute of Limitations on this sort of thing.

There actually is, it's how many years can LL really be bothered to sift through conversations along the lines of 'Does my bum look big in this?'

Edited May 15 by JacksonBollock
grammar-ish

[brodiac90]

18 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

The Governance meeting really did not offer any more clarity to what had already been said. Its only good point was the Lab considering to relook at some aspects of the modesty panel.

At the meeting they clarified that but also: 

• What age the policy applies to.
• Who it applies to - the mention of furries and those in the anime community was new. 
• They also clarified whether people could have child avatars and adult avatars on the same account or not. 
• They also explained how they look at accidental TPs. 

18 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Its an opinion that has been universal only on the SL moderated forums where the smart ones don't blab or may make waves that might implicate them. There has been posts however that expressed displeasure about the Adult land prohibition even from some of the prepubescent avatars who had family areas on Adult land. Maybe you didn't see them and I would have too hard a time to find and link them but they have been posted.

These forums are not the only place that I get my information. I also look at Reddit and of course talk to people in world. Other than yourself, I know of one person ( I spoke to them in world) who was upset that they'll now have to move their family home from adult land. Do I think that's rubbish for them in the short term? Yes, will it probably a good thing in the long run? I think so. 

18 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I've never identified as a minor but some of the outfits and looks I have could be seen as possibly being of someone arguably under 18. You probably don't wish to significantly change your 9 year old look as much as I don't wish to transitioning to a 25 year old look. 

 

I can understand that. The skin I wear I've had for a long time and I'll be sad when I have to change it for one with modesty layers, not because I disagree with the modesty layers, but because I've become attached to that particular skin. I've also accepted that I may end up having to use a different child avatar body if Tweenster does not update. 

I think the 'arguably' part is a problem for you though. You may not identify as a child, but thinking back, how do you feel about the fact that others around you may have seen you as a child? 

Edited May 15 by brodiac90

[Sadvhi]

If I wanted to appear over 18, I could not continue wearing the same shape or skin. I tried aging up my avatar out of curiosity and I looked like I was 15-16ish. I would imagine that wearing an adult body with a built in petite/flat chest or a body with those addons could fall under "accessories generally associated with children", since they gives the appearance of not yet having gone through puberty. For me, however, the issue I had trying to appear older had to do with my features, skin and shape - even without such addons.