Lindens Statements from Governance Meeting

[Persephone Emerald]

48 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

It had occurred to me that the famous statue of the Capitoline Wolf, which shows a she-wolf suckling the infants Romulus and Remus should now be completely banned in SL: it shows two naked infants with full frontal genitals, and no less than eight wolf teats!

Although I suppose some enterprising content creator could bake in some modestly layers?

I am actually assuming (hopeful thing that I am) that no AR against a Renaissance painting featuring naked putti is going to be taken seriously?

Reminder: The new TOS is about child-presenting avatars, not about art.

[BilliJo Aldrin]

8 hours ago, brodiac90 said:

The following statements regarding previously discussed issues RE the TOS changes to child avatars were made at the Governance meeting on 09/5/24 between 14:00 - 15:00 by Tommy Linden and Keira Linden. At no point am I attempting to pass myself off as a Linden, all of these statements were made in public chat and have been copy and pasted as they were posted. They do not necessarily appear in the order they were said and not everything that was said has been included for brevity's sake. I have tried my best to present the statements in order of the communities biggest concerns. I have consulted with Tommy Linden and asked his permission to post these statements.  Please note these statments reflect what Tommy Linden and Keira Linden said on 09/05/24 and that Linden Labs reserves the right to change its TOS and child avatar policy at any time. These statments will no longer be factually correct if and when Linden Labs updates its current position. 

My own thoughts - It is clear the Lindens and Moles have been listening to community feedback and that they have clarified a lot of quesitons. 

 

Q: Modesty layers | What does cannot be removed mean? 

Keira Linden - 

In response to a question pointing out skins can be replaced. 

Keira Linden - 

Tommy Linden adding support - 

Keira Linden clarifying: 

Keira Linden: 

Tommy Linden when asked to clarify timeline of when bom underwear / alphas will be phased out for skin modesty layers. Stressing education will be offered first if that is possible. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question: What ages does the policy apply to? Is it just for little children or anyone under 18? 

Keira Linden: 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question: Do furries and other child like avatars fall under the new policy? 

Tommy Linden - 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question: Will you consider removing the back part of the modesty layer for female presenting child avatars? 

Keira Linden - 

Keira Linden expanding: 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question: Surely requiring bras / chest modesty layers on babies / toddlers sexualises them, will you consider removing this requirement? 

Keria Linden: 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question: Can a child presenting avatar also have an adult presenting avatar on the same account? What happens if I'm reported for being a child avatar while presenting as an adult avatar? 

Keira Linden: 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question: How are falisified reports dealt with? 

Tommy Linden: 

Tommy Linden adding extra information on false reports: 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question: How will the TOS changes 'meet the road' with regard to accidental teleports? 

Keira Linden: 

 

So what they are doing means nothing at all, because when a child wants to do the nasty with an adult, which is an instant perma ban anyway, they will (oh my god nooooo) replace the modesty patch skin with an older skin without the modesty patch, do it, then put the proper skin back on afterwards. 😂

WTG LL, you have done absolutly NOTHING except antagonize and upset innocent child avis everywhere

[Love Zhaoying]

4 hours ago, MoiraKathleen said:

  I would hope that the average resident isn't going to be going around checking and submitting AR's just for the lack of proper modesty skins - that would be kind of creep

No different than real life. IJS. IYKYK.

[elleevelyn]

i watched the vid of the townhall

it came up lots in the chat from quite a few different people about baby girl avatars being required to wear a top. How having to wear a bra sexualises baby girls more than wearing no top. And because male/female/fluid child chests are all the same then o.m.g. how can we ever determine whats what

is common sense not part of how we think about these things ?

if the requirement is to wear a top, and the senra bra top teen example is the minimum, then isn't it common sense that a child avatar top could be more than a bra ?  Like it can be a singlet or t-shirt

Keira Linden mentioned that she is going to recommend Linden relook at the top requirement re teens

based on the community feedback at this townhall then I would not be surprised if Linden determine that all avatars that present as underage must wear a full singlet in addition to underpants regardless of gender

the lack of common sense on display on this point from some of the participants in this townhall is pretty much nuts

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Persephone Emerald said:

Reminder: The new TOS is about child-presenting avatars, not about art.

But it could mean Scylla can't make that art now in Second Life. 

[Qie Niangao]

Well, I finally made it through the video. First, I'll join the chorus of thanks to brodiac90 for being the calm voice of reason through what was obviously a zoo environment.

Also thanks for starting the thread with a good summary transcript of where the Lindens added actual information. To expand a bit around the "removable skin" part:

Quote

[14:58:32] brodiac90 Resident: Does cannot be removed simply mean child avatars should never remove them, that they can't be removed by being derendered, or does it mean at a more concrete level on the skin / body itself.
[...]
[14:59:22] Keira Linden: Cannot be removed means just that. It cannot be removed by any means.
[...]
[15:59:36] Anwenn Resident: You do realize skins can be removed, right?
[...]
[14:59:53] Keira Linden: Yes, and if a new one is applied then it will need to have the modesty layers.

In fact, skins cannot be removed per se, they can only be replaced.⁽¹⁾ That's just a wording thing, but it calls attention to the fact that "cannot be removed" means (necessarily) "must only be replaced by a similarly modesty-layered skin".

So in a sense, that's very good news. It's clear that the "modesty layer" is only a property of these new skin files, not some freakish rearchitecting of the mesh itself.⁽²⁾ That said, I gather some child body meshes will need to be retired because they have sex-specific geometry, and that is… really, it always was unfortunate. It's a little gross that folks who used those bodies innocently for years with those polys hidden the whole time under frilly skirts and BoM alpha masks are suddenly forced to consider those old bodies "sexual". (There's that "very weird and a little icky" thing again.)

But it also makes evident what has always been the case: a violation, intentional or accidental, is and will always remain one click away in the Outfits folder. And equally evident: it's up to the person using a child avatar not to make that click, intentionally or accidentally, however much magic is ascribed to "cannot be removed".

I probably shouldn't have been surprised that Governance was given the lead on pulling this policy together. It's fine, but maybe that's why it doesn't seem to bother them that "cannot" and "must not" get so conflated here. And I suppose it's hard to put much priority on the innocent majority of child avatar users when the focus is on tracking down reports of devious ways to gross out the rest of the grid. And that focus sharpened by a disinformation-fueled PR nightmare dumped in Governance's lap.

_____________________________
¹ Unless we're talking about a different kind of "skin" on bodies yet to be invented, with non-BoM "skins" that can be removed, under which something else—full transparency maybe—would cover the mesh. Pretty clear, though, none of that is on the table, thank heavens.

² I swear one poster here has a fetish about sewing shut little kids genitals in Blender.

[JacksonBollock]

Quote

[14:54] Tommy Linden: In regards to potentially falsified reports, this is why we do not rely on just the report itself, it is merely the starting point that we use for our investigation. As mentioned previously, I can not disclose our internal tools, but we have various ways to review a report and the context around every situation, to help us ensure we are taking the appropriate action.

OK, so this is the nub of the matter right here (for me anyway).

First and foremost, the workflow in place to "investigate" reports is effectively a black-box. There will be no auditability or transparency, Linden Lab will do what they do  - end of story.

Why the lack of transparency? 2 main reasons:
 

1. Due to lack of investment and adequately trained and empowered staff, as well as the perceived risk to Linden Lab of mis-calling a report, the onus of proof will be on the "accused" rather than the "accuser". No presumption of innocence here folks.
   
   It'll be much safer, easier, and less expense to decide "in favour" of the accuser.
   
   Much better to have some internal complaints from customers which LL can effectively ignore, than risk a potential PR disaster and press coverage (including images) of an incident which was reported but miscalled in favour of the accused.
   
   There is no upside for Linden Lab to spend too much time "disproving" an allegation.
    
2. The "internal tools" aren't being disclosed, nor will they be publicly cited in support of any decision, for the very simple reason that it would then confirm to SL users just how much data and analytics Linden Lab have access to concerning even the smallest interaction you have within Second Life.
   
   Anyone who's actually been alive in this century has a fair idea, but to have it confirmed and exposed would I think be quite another thing for most people not in the industry.

If you want to see what this new process really looks like, you just have to look at what happens in terms of AR process within these very forums.

All the Best
Jackson

PS. Thanks to @brodiac90 for sharing the key points.

Edited May 10 by JacksonBollock
thanks to @brodiac90

[Qie Niangao]

1 minute ago, JacksonBollock said:

Why the lack of transparency?

Well, there's a pretty big third reason though: drama containment.

I'd add to it myself, probably. If I got a little report from Governance each time they bestirred themselves to finally act on one of my adfarm ARs, I'd have a hard time not posting that on a blog along with all the other adfarmer scalps and shrunken heads. That wouldn't be good for virtual world comity, but I'd have a hard time stopping myself. I expect anti-child-avatar crusaders would do the same. God knows we already hear a lot from their innocent (?) victims. If all that Governance activity were reported back, there'd be no end of rancor.

On the other hand, reporting some metrics for once wouldn't kill anybody.

[Theresa Tennyson]

8 hours ago, Arwyn Quandry said:

The requirement of baked on perma-undies on all under 18s is going to present some real problems for teen avatars. They mostly use adult skins. Are adult skinmakers going to have to start including perma-undie versions on all of their body skins? Is that even likely? I wish I knew some to ask.

I'm only going by summaries so I have to confirm this, but from what I've seen that isn't what the Lindens said. They always answered that by saying basically, 'Teen avatars have to follow the child avatar policy." For end users, that only says that the avatar can never be nude. They don't require them to wear things with baked-in layers - those are for content sellers. I'm starting to think that the idea they're trying to conform to Approid requirements makes a lot of sense.

Excuse me...

Theresa Tennyson's teen-age avatar is about to head out. The sides of her panties are pulled up over the top of her shorts and her bra straps are hanging out under her tank top - okay, she's always dressed like that but that's besides the point.

"Are you going out dressed like that?"

"Mawmmm! I hafta so everyone knows I'm following the rules!"

[JacksonBollock]

51 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Well, there's a pretty big third reason though: drama containment.

I'd add to it myself, probably. If I got a little report from Governance each time they bestirred themselves to finally act on one of my adfarm ARs, I'd have a hard time not posting that on a blog along with all the other adfarmer scalps and shrunken heads. That wouldn't be good for virtual world comity, but I'd have a hard time stopping myself. I expect anti-child-avatar crusaders would do the same. God knows we already hear a lot from their innocent (?) victims. If all that Governance activity were reported back, there'd be no end of rancor.

On the other hand, reporting some metrics for once wouldn't kill anybody.

Well there's that, but also if LL were ever to fully reveal the extent of these "internal tools", and the granularity of data points available, then they wouldn't be able to continue to use "ignorance as a defence" when responding to any other types of incident or complaint.

"Physician, heal thyself," comes to mind.

Edited May 10 by JacksonBollock

[Arielle Popstar]

1 minute ago, JacksonBollock said:

Well there's that, but also if LL were ever to fully reveal the extent of these "internal tools", and the granularity of data points available, then they wouldn't be able to continue to use "ignorance as a defence" when responding to any other types of incident or complaint.

Never mind the potential uproar should residents become aware of how everything they say and do even in IM is recorded. Anything you say or do may be used against you in a Court of Lindens

[Kathlen Onyx]

2 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Never mind the potential uproar should residents become aware of how everything they say and do even in IM is recorded. Anything you say or do may be used against you in a Court of Lindens

Not if you do all your important chatting on Discord. I won't define "important".

[brodiac90]

2 hours ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

So what they are doing means nothing at all, because when a child wants to do the nasty with an adult, which is an instant perma ban anyway, they will (oh my god nooooo) replace the modesty patch skin with an older skin without the modesty patch, do it, then put the proper skin back on afterwards. 😂

WTG LL, you have done absolutly NOTHING except antagonize and upset innocent child avis everywhere

I think the original plan was to have one that could never be removed under any circumstances, but they've kind of had to push that back when people pointed out the technical issues of this. 

The language very much went from 30th June is the deadline (and that is still technically true while it's in the documents) to talking about educating people and using BOM and alphas as temporary solutions and 'we don't have a concrete time line but we'll update you as soon as it's no longer an option.'

I get the impression they're going to migrate everyone to using skin modesty layers while they work on something more permanent in the background. 

I think if LL wants that to happen then they're going to need to make their own heavily protected and coded child avatars. They could make three, one for toddlers, one for prepubescent children and one for teenagers, all with the relevant modesty layers. That would be a good idea. 

 

[Stephanie Misfit]

6 hours ago, Persephone Emerald said:

The issue is that a bra-like upper body garment will show through many styles of clothing. Of course a bra-like garment on a baby or toddler would also look ridiculous and make SL a huge laughing stock in the gaming and virtual world culture. 

Well, I hope that creators of modesty layers are a bit more creative when making the underwear design, to make something that looks like it would suit a child. The design LL showed is just a guide to what the modesty layer needs to cover. Designers could make all sorts of cute underwear, it would not need to be in that style.

[Arielle Popstar]

9 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said:

Not if you do all your important chatting on Discord. I won't define "important".

Not everybody is on Discord and though I have it, I don't care for it and find it inconvenient. I would wish they included it in the viewer like FS used to have IRC a few years ago. It didn't go through the SL servers if I remember so wouldn't be recorded by them afaik.

[Chery Amore]

Thanks for posting the key statements @brodiac90 they were more helpful than watching that whole mess.

[Kathlen Onyx]

17 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Not everybody is on Discord and though I have it, I don't care for it and find it inconvenient. I would wish they included it in the viewer like FS used to have IRC a few years ago. It didn't go through the SL servers if I remember so wouldn't be recorded by them afaik.

I find my privacy well worth the inconvenience.

[JacksonBollock]

14 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Not everybody is on Discord and though I have it, I don't care for it and find it inconvenient. I would wish they included it in the viewer like FS used to have IRC a few years ago. It didn't go through the SL servers if I remember so wouldn't be recorded by them afaik.

I've wondered about this as well,

I get the feeling that a TPV which incorporated a Discord interface and marketed itself as the "Privacy" viewer would be pretty popular.

Is there anything like that already?

[BilliJo Aldrin]

LL doublethink

You must wear a modesty panel skin that cannot be removed

If you remove your modesty panel skin that cannot be removed, you will be banned.

Huh? 😂

[Chery Amore]

The way I read it is.  If you present as underage by the deadline you must have  a body that has the underwear built in  and completely non-removable. If you are able to put a skin on it it has to be a skin that has the modesty layer as part of the skin. Full Stop.    However they are possibly allowing for more time and the individual education process will be very lenient for awhile if they are investigating the account over modesty layer non-compliance alone.

[BilliJo Aldrin]

59 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Never mind the potential uproar should residents become aware of how everything they say and do even in IM is recorded. Anything you say or do may be used against you in a Court of Lindens

You mean some people dont know that LL has a record of every thing you type?

LOL @ some people

[Arielle Popstar]

12 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

You mean some people dont know that LL has a record of every thing you type?

LOL @ some people

Guess I never thought of it and I do wonder if Europeans can't have those records expunged as it would be personal. Only leaves Americans and Canadians vulnerable to investigations.

[brodiac90]

I considered addressing the non binary issues raised last night in the original post, but eventually decided against it because I didn't want there to be any confusion on what the Linden statements were, and because quite frankfully filtering through all the chat messages was exhausting and I already went to bed late enough as it is (I'm UK based so SLT +8). I know, get to bed kid! Lol. 

 Now to be serious again. 

I don't think the non binary issue is as serious as some people are thinking, at least not in SL. Let me explain. 

• The majority of all child avatars (with the exception of older ones with options for breasts) come out of the box as already being non binary as they don't have any genatalia or m/f anatomy. 
• It is the user making a combination of choices such as skin, shape, hair, makeup (if appropriate), clothing, accessories, display name (if it's not a unisex name), what they tell people they identify as, how they act, etc, which determines how they present themselves and whether they are percieved as male / female / masculine / feminine. 
• There is no reason why people cannot respect people's choice of pronouns for he/she/they or anything else if that is what people choose to do. The policy doesn't forbid this. You can still identify however you want in regards to gender, but biology is still a thing hence why LL have specified the 'female' and 'male'. Unlike RL though, people can choose their biology very easily. 
• RL children who are transitioning do not get to choose so easily. Those born female and wishing to transition to males would still be expected to cover up until they're fully transitioned etc. 
• The only issue is if an avatar with very defined breasts insists they're a male and so they don't need to wear the female modesty layer. In those cirumcstances, sorry, TOS overidesd identity issues. 
• We discussed in the modesty layer thread how this would work in practice: basically, you make your avatar, and decide whether it's presenting as 'male' or 'female' and which one it is more likely to be percieved as, and then you use the most appropriate modesty layer. If tomorrow you decide to present as something else, then make the same determination. Being able to present as different genders has always been a thing, and will continue to be a thing. 

I hope that covers everything, please forgive me if I've missed anything, and if any offence was caused it was not my intention. 

Edited May 10 by brodiac90
amended he/she/it for he/she/they

[Arielle Popstar]

56 minutes ago, JacksonBollock said:

I've wondered about this as well,

I get the feeling that a TPV which incorporated a Discord interface and marketed itself as the "Privacy" viewer would be pretty popular.

Is there anything like that already?

Not that I know of though I heard a developer talking about that it would be nice. Not sure if it can be done though I wouldn't know why not.

[brodiac90]

I realised I put he/she/it when I should have typed he/she/they - apologies. 

Edited May 10 by brodiac90